Terms of applying to the court for consideration of individual labor disputes

In accordance with article 160 of the Labor Code, the following deadlines are set for applying to the conciliation commission or the court for the consideration of individual labor disputes:

for disputes about reinstatement at work - one month from the date of delivery of a copy of the employer's act on termination of the employment contract to the conciliation commission, and for applying to the court - two months from the date of delivery of a copy of the decision of the conciliation commission when applying for unresolved disputes or in case of non-fulfillment of its decision by the party to the employment contract;

In other labor disputes, it is one year from the day when the employee or employer learned or should have learned about the violation of his right.

The term of the application for consideration of individual labor disputes is suspended during the period of validity of the mediation agreement on the labor dispute under consideration, as well as in the absence of a conciliation commission before its establishment.

In accordance with the Regulatory Decision of the Supreme Court "On certain issues of the application of legislation by courts in the resolution of labor disputes", the terms of the appeal are applied by the court only upon the application of the party to the dispute.

According to the sixth part of Article 172 of the CPC, if the statute of limitations or the time limit for applying to the court are missed without valid reasons, the judge decides to dismiss the claim without examining other factual circumstances of the case. The fact of missing the deadline is established on the basis of the plaintiff's request to restore the missed deadline or the defendant's request to apply the limitation period.

If the court finds that the labor rights of the party have been violated, but she has missed the deadline provided for by the Labor Code without valid reasons, the court in the reasoning part of the decision indicates a violation of these rights, and in connection with the omission of the deadline denies the claim. In such cases, the plaintiff's motion to restore the missed deadline or the defendant's motion to apply the statute of limitations, received during the preparation of the case for trial, may be considered by the court in a preliminary hearing with a decision to dismiss the claim.

If it is established that the deadlines provided for in Article 160 of the Labor Code were missed for a valid reason, the court shall indicate this in the reasoning part of the decision and resolve the dispute on the merits.

For example: On June 28, 2016, the Taldykorgan City Court of the Almaty region considered the case of T.E.B.'s claim to the Department of Internal Affairs of the Almaty region for recognizing the dismissal order as illegal, reinstatement at work and special rank, recovery of the amount for the time of forced absenteeism, compensation for moral damage and court costs. The court of first instance reasonably concluded that the plaintiff's labor rights had been violated, but they had missed the deadline for applying to court provided for in Article 172 of the Labor Code without valid reasons, and therefore the claim was denied. At the same time, the court justified the reasons for the refusal to satisfy the claim due to the omission of the limitation period by the requirements established by civil law, namely Articles 179-180 of the Civil Code, losing sight of the fact that the claim was filed in a labor dispute and is based on the norms of the Labor Code. In this case, it was necessary to be guided by the norm of the Labor Code, which provides for special terms for applying to the court, since the dispute arose from an employment relationship.

It should be established that the reasons for missing the deadline are valid. Valid reasons may include circumstances that prevent an employee from filing a lawsuit in a timely manner: the plaintiff's illness, caring for a sick close relative, for whom he had to provide permanent care, a business trip, the inability to go to court due to a natural disaster or other force majeure, etc.

There are cases when, before applying to the court, plaintiffs applied to the prosecutor's office and the labor protection inspector (social protection authorities) for reinstatement, after which they filed lawsuits with the court.

In judicial practice, there are cases when the court restored the violated rights of an employee who applied to the court for reinstatement after appealing against a decision of the criminal prosecution authorities in cases that had previously been terminated on non-rehabilitating grounds.

 

 

Attention!   

       Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.  

 For more information,  please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085. 

Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office  Court Cases