When I got this letter, I was surprised at what the postman has noticed visible, who writes me something. I had not expected. Later I became aware that there does a state apparatus. How it works. How it works. I see people sitting at a table and talk about the case saw no one, no words about it. All this is interesting. For a correct view of the points about which no one has made. has only taken at the beginning of everything, it is quite well covered, but much was open and that's why these methods help, so that someone makes a very good look then. Now I can read a little on the substance but not negligible distortion, is one of two points and thus must be some must not be that it intends to disappear from view. In the former company, it was similar, and people have talked for months to decipher and played wrong even a few hundred people, but has discovered the error was never invited. The state apparatus is alive. Yes, that's safe. A closer look must be missing me. I will not judge. But one thing I am left wondering how many such cases, and solves problems of the time, because there is no interest in solving this conflict more easily, because the time has passed over it.
"The Appeals Court, pursuant to a Court of Appeal, in work and social welfare cases by the Senate President of the Higher Regional Court (Name, Title) as Chairperson and judges of the Higher Regional Court (name, title) and (name, title) (Senate § 11a para 2 ASGG) in the case, the requesting party (name and address), because of legal aid, represented by the following appeal by the federal auditor of labor and social Court Vienna against the decision of the Labour and Social Court Vienna on 12.10.2010, 9 Nc 34/10w-3, taken in closed session Decision: The appeal is given
episode, repealed the contested decision and the case for a fresh decision after further proceedings on
the trial court remanded.
Reason:
The applicant sought the granting of legal aid in full to bring an action against his former employer, Siemens, because
issue a service certificate and payment of outstanding remuneration in connection with an inaccurate recording of hours worked and otherwise of a
Operating Agreement concerning certain Absences for a total of about EUR 700, --.
With the contested decision, the trial court granted the applicant applied for legal aid in the amount of § 64 paragraph 1 no 1, 3 and 4 ZPO without further notice.
This decision depends on the appeal by the federal government, represented by the auditor at the Labour and Social Court in Vienna, due to defects of the method and incorrect legal assessment with the application to annul the contested decision and apply to the court of first instance a new decision after further proceedings.
The applicant has not been involved in the appeal process.
The appeal is justified in the result.
The appellants complained, rightly, that the Trial court had failed to clarify whether the applicant's commitment in his power - legal expenses insurance cover specified in § 64 para 1 No 1, 3 and 4 ZPO cited legal costs - that the contested decision was clearly based.
The list of assets of the applicant on 20.9.2010, ON 2 has a legal expenses insurance to insurance policies in the XXXXX-No. XXXXXX with a sum insured of EUR XXXXX, without, however, provide an indication of the length. This does not however been fully resolved if all if the cost listed in § 64 para 1 no
1, 3 and 4 ZPO procedure in this contract by the insurance company be worn. In this respect, the list of assets is not completed.
The trial court would be based on this flawed legal aid application was required to initiate an improvement procedure under § § 84 and 85 ZPO a deadline. omitted, since this has been a substantial violation has occurred (Klauser / Kodek, ZPO16 (2006) § 66 E 11 c).
The appeal was therefore give order and set aside the contested decision. The first court to pass on the continuing process to complete the list of assets, which are all necessary to teach the rejection of a cover letter from the legal protection insurer.
is also This confession of the assets in need of completion on the examination of a possible maintenance claim by the applicant to his wife and one below 3.4 indicated other income. In this regard, referring only to the applicant submitted supplements without result from this more evidence of such.
are also discussing the need of information from the applicant in particular on outstanding liabilities to the assets in the confession given home ownership.
this regard is the commitment to asset disclosure by the Land Registry data and the amount and the due date if all related liabilities supplement
.
will finally be with the recent decision on the legal aid application if no legal protection cover is added to take into account that the documented to date income in the amount of EUR 1226.10 per month in unemployment compensation not only
is irrelevant to the unattachable amount to a wage garnishment and the no caring responsibilities or face liability. Considering this, it would be possible to
applicants, at least in part by § 64 para 1 No 1, 3 and 4 ZPO covered costs of the intended proceedings themselves, without its necessary maintenance at risk. "
A few words from me on a small contribution to that nothing is missed:
"the applicant has not been involved in the appeal process is there, so a few words. I was with the appeal in the Labor, I once heard that I must do nothing that it was only a message that runs all the other times, two weeks later, a consultancy, there is nothing more, legal aid is refused, no ensure there is no duplication.
why I was surprised, but pleased of the disclosure of the decision.
To the point.
your colleague at the very beginning the matter in the near future in all acceptable words has taken. Here are now two points from a point and unfortunately distorting.
The 700 € refer to difference calculation sheet and the actual payout. The calculation sheet was at least accurate of the department which is responsible for everything. After all, the basis of mutual consent.
not applied operating agreement covers two points, one is a few years back, the company was not then and still less willing to accept this time at all that they mistakenly see the staff members, has been withdrawn (not loud, quiet already, as the program unnecessary after a long discussion has been changed), the other point is perhaps still wrong that this would be a just cited point of absence. Since the 700 € would not be enough by far.
your colleague at the very beginning has talked about legal aid in full because the matter is very complicated and extensive, and I was always in the expectation that I will even invited so that the situation is looked at very carefully before you as many other steps here.
way, I passed on the Labour get a third presentation of a service products (all other points are no longer for Labour for an answer from the company Siemens relevant, despite an otherwise mutually agreed solution, a two-sided legal business), which is not very different from the first two, still only the last few months have led to foreign occupation, ignored the rest completely.
understand why I was pleased this decision.
As for my financial situation now rests with the Land Registry. We received only a week before Christmas. It takes everything.
Any maintenance claims against my wife?
We live together, and it will stay that way. My wife goes to work. If this answer is sufficient. Otherwise, we have
large expenditure, the apartment requires some work. This was feasible at that time because we had to look at a new, but because a new cooperative apartment had no living and quality of life and was not to buy.
As more and more is desired, then please tell me. "
0 comments:
Post a Comment