Employer's letter terminating contract unilaterally overrides employee's letter inviting negotiations, establishing termination date.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court partially overturned the lower court's decision regarding a labor dispute between a doctor and a medical center. The employee had sent a letter inviting negotiations to terminate the contract, while the employer responded with a unilateral termination notice specifying a one-month notice period. The court ruled that the employee's letter was merely an invitation to negotiate and did not constitute a valid offer or resignation, whereas the employer's letter was a clear unilateral declaration of termination. Consequently, the contract was deemed terminated by the employer's notice, but the statutory three-month notice period applied, extending the termination date to July 31, 2005, rather than the date specified by the employer.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 30 § 1 k.p.; Art. 72 § 1 k.c.: An employee's letter requesting contract termination negotiations is not a unilateral declaration of will or an offer to terminate, but an invitation to negotiate; a subsequent employer's letter containing all elements of termination (method and date) constitutes a valid unilateral declaration of will that terminates the contract, with the statutory notice period governing the effective date if the employer unilaterally shortens it.