Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
I PR 1/95 AI generated

Supreme Court remands case to determine if train crew time at turnarounds exceeding 3 hours constitutes work time or duty under Labor Code.

Case Number I PR 1/95
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Poland (PL)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Poland remanded the case to the Regional Labor Court for a new trial regarding the classification of train crew time at turnarounds. The lower courts had inconsistently treated this time as either work time or duty, leading to disputes over wage differences. The Court ruled that the first instance judgment was flawed because it failed to comprehensively evaluate the work schedules against statutory norms, necessitating a fresh assessment of whether the time constituted work or duty.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 128 k.p.; Art. 144 k.p.; Work time includes all periods where the employee is at the employer's disposal, whereas duty applies to planned breaks where no work is performed; if the schedule fails to meet statutory work time norms, the remaining time must be classified as work time.

Keywords

AI generated
Labor Code Work Time Definition Duty Classification Turnaround Schedules Statutory Work Norms Remand for Trial Railway Employees

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 128 k.p.
Art. 144 k.p.
Art. 22 § 1 k.p.
Art. 388 § 1 k.p.c.
Art. 391 § 1 zd. 2 k.p.c.
§ 1 ust. 1 rozporządzenia Rady Ministrów z dnia 23 grudnia 1988 r.
§ 40 ust. 2 rozporządzenia Rady Ministrów z dnia 27 grudnia 1974 r.
Rozporządzenie Rady Ministrów z dnia 20 kwietnia 1993 r.
art. 128 k.p
art. 144 k.p

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text