Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Refine search results

Journals help

  1. 2 Acta Iuris Stetinensis

Years help

  1. 2 2019

Authors help

  1. 2 Wróbel A.

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  criminal and legal protection of employee rights
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

Commentary to the Supreme Court resolution of 20 september 2018, I KZP 5/18

100%
Wróbel A.
Acta Iuris Stetinensis
|
2019
|
issue 27_ENG
205-216
EN
The Supreme Court, in the ruling which is subject to this commentary, addresses the notion of an employee referred to in Article 218 § 1a of the Criminal Code. The court discussed the issue of the designation and limits of the notion of “employee” and the subject-matter of protection of the provision referred to above along with its scope. The commentator – in this context – analyses the Supreme Court’s thinking. The commentary’s author agrees in most part with the belief that “the scope of Article 218 § 1a CrC covers only persons who are employees within the meaning of Article 2 LC and Article 22 § 1 and § 11 LC”, though he deems it incomplete as one also needs to take into account Article 8(2a) of the act on social insurance, where – with regard to social insurance – the notion of an employee is slightly broader than the one included in the provisions of the Labour Code. The commentator believes it legitimate that the subject-matter of protection of Article 218 § 1a CrC includes all employee rights resulting from an employment or social insurance relationship. The commentator shares the de lege ferenda postulate for the “protection under Article 218 § 1a CrC to include also persons in employment relationships other that a contract of employment” and, which the Court did not address in the discussed resolution, the civil law relationship referred to in Article 8(2a) of the Social Insurance Act.
2

Glosa do uchwały Sądu Najwyższego z 20 września 2018 roku, I KZP 5/18

63%
Wróbel A.
Acta Iuris Stetinensis
|
2019
|
issue 27
211-222
PL
Sąd Najwyższy w orzeczeniu, które było przedmiotem glosowania, poruszył kwestię pracownika, o którym mowa w art. 218 § 1a k.k. Sąd ten odniósł się do zagadnienia, jaki jest desygnat i jakie są granice pojęcia „pracownik”, a także co jest przedmiotem ochrony powyżej wskazanego przepisu, jaki jest jej zakres. Glosator – w tymże kontekście – poddał analizie myśl Sądu Najwyższego. Autor glosy zgodził się w głównej mierze z poglądem, że „zakresem art. 218 § 1a k.k. objęte są tylko osoby będące pracownikami w rozumieniu art. 2 k.p. i art. 22 § 1 i § 11 k.p.”, uznał go jednak za niepełny, bowiem należy mieć także na względzie w przypadku przestępstwa z art. 218 § 1a k.k., art. 8 ust. 2a ustawy o systemie ubezpieczeń społecznych, gdzie – w przypadku ubezpieczeń społecznych – pojęcie pracownika jest nieco szersze niż to zawarte w przepisach kodeksu pracy. Glosator uznał za zasadne twierdzenie, że przedmiotem ochrony art. 218 § 1a k.k. są wszelkie prawa pracownika wynikające ze stosunku pracy lub ubezpieczenia społecznego oraz podzielił postulat de lege ferenda, „aby ochroną art. 218 § 1a k.k. objąć również osoby pozostające w stosunkach zatrudnienia innych niż stosunek pracy” i – o czym nie wspomniał sąd w glosowanej uchwale – stosunek cywilnoprawny, o którym mowa w art. 8 ust 2a ustawy o systemie ubezpieczeń społecznych.
EN
The Supreme Court, in the ruling which is subject to this commentary, addresses the notion of an employee referred to in Article 218 § 1a of the Criminal Code. The court discussed the issue of the designation and limits of the notion of “employee” and the subject-matter of protection of the provision referred to above along with its scope. The commentator – in this context – analyses the Supreme Court’s thinking. The commentary’s author agrees in most part with the belief that “the scope of Article 218 § 1a CrC covers only persons who are employees within the meaning of Article 2 LC and Article 22 § 1 and § 11 LC”, though he deems it incomplete as one also needs to take into account Article 8(2a) of the act on social insurance, where – with regard to social insurance – the notion of an employee is slightly broader than the one included in the provisions of the Labour Code. The commentator believes it legitimate that the subject-matter of protection of Article 218 § 1a CrC includes all employee rights resulting from an employment or social insurance relationship. The commentator shares the de lege ferenda postulate for the “protection under Article 218 § 1a CrC to include also persons in employment relationships other that a contract of employment” and, which the Court did not address in the discussed resolution, the civil law relationship referred to in Article 8(2a) of the Social Insurance Act.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.