1. The subject of the dispute is the recovery of unpaid wages, compensation for unused vacation, severance pay, and average earnings for the delay in settlement upon dismissal.
2. The court of cassation instance, when considering the case, took into account that a labor contract was concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant, the terms of which are of primary importance when resolving the dispute regarding wages. The court noted that no changes were made to the contract regarding the amount of the official salary, therefore, one should proceed from the conditions specified in the contract. Also, the court took into account the circumstances that prevented the defendant from making timely settlement with the plaintiff upon dismissal, in particular, the suspension of financial transactions by the bank and the seizure of funds in criminal proceedings. The court emphasized that the absence of the employer’s fault in the delay in settlement excludes his responsibility in the form of payment of average earnings for the delay period. In addition, the court of cassation instance redistributed court costs between the parties, taking into account the partial satisfaction of the defendant’s cassation appeal. The court of cassation instance emphasized that when interpreting a labor contract, one should proceed from the principles of good faith, justice, and reasonableness, and doubts about its validity should be interpreted in favor of its validity, provided that the provisions of the contract do not worsen the situation of employees.
3. The court of cassation instance partially satisfied the defendant’s cassation appeal, overturning the decision of the appellate court regarding the recovery of average earnings for the delay in settlement upon dismissal, and refused to satisfy the plaintiff’s cassation appeal.
