1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the order to cancel the previous order to reinstate the plaintiff to a position in the prosecutor’s office, and the claims for reinstatement to the position and recovery of average earnings for the period of forced absence from work.
2. The court of cassation instance, when considering the case, proceeded from the fact that the plaintiff was dismissed from his position based on the order of October 22, 2019, which the plaintiff appealed in court. By the decision of the court of first instance, upheld by the appellate court, the dismissal order was canceled, and the plaintiff was reinstated to his position. However, later the Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the previous instances and dismissed the claim to cancel the dismissal order. In this regard, the Office of the Prosecutor General issued an order to cancel the order to reinstate the plaintiff to his position. The Supreme Court noted that since the court decisions that canceled the dismissal order of the plaintiff lost their legal force, the basis for the plaintiff’s reinstatement also ceased to have a legal basis. The court indicated that the disputed order to cancel the reinstatement is not a dismissal order, but a personnel decision made on the basis of the current dismissal order. At the same time, the Supreme Court departed from previous practice and indicated that in such a case, the employer should have indicated in the disputed order the actual date of the plaintiff’s dismissal, taking into account the time he worked after being reinstated to his position.
3. The court of cassation instance partially granted the cassation appeal, overturning the decisions of the previous instances regarding the claims for recognizing as unlawful and canceling the order, and issued a new decision to partially satisfy the claim, recognizing as unlawful and canceling the order of the Office of the Prosecutor General regarding the determination of the actual date of dismissal, and changing the actual date of the plaintiff’s dismissal to December 19, 2022.
