Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
44
ChapterIV.Interpretationofprovisionsoflabourlaw
First,ifthereisaloophole,thelegislatureordersapplicationofananalogiaelegismeth-
od(reasoningfromsimilarity)whichconsistsinapplicationofaprovisionofthesame
branchoflaw(labourlaw)ascloseaspossibletothesituationtoberesolved.Itisworth
notingthatthismethodmaynotalwaysbeappliedinthelabourlaw,forexamplewith
regardtotheregulationofanemployee’scapacitytoperformactsinlawprovidedfor
inArticle22§3oftheLabourCodeanditsinadequacytodeterminetheemployer’s
capacitytoperformactsinlaw.Insuchcase,Article300oftheLabourCodeal-
lowstheapplicationofanalogiaelegisfromcivillaw,limitedonlytotheprovisions
oftheCivilCode.Theanalogiaeiurismethod(reasoningfromlawaboutlaw),tobe
appliedfurther,consistsinthecreationofanormativesolutiononthebasisofapplica-
blelaws.
Theprocessofclosinglegalloopholesmayinvolvealso:
1)Argumentumacontrario,accordingtowhichifasituationmeetscertaincon-
ditions,itisassociatedwithcertainlegalconsequences,andonthecontrary:if
thesituationdoesnotmeetsuchconditions,itwillnothavesuchconsequences;
2)Argumentumafortiori,inaformofamaioriadminusargumentation(ifalegal
normallowsonetodomore,thenitalsoallowsonetodoless)andinaform
ofaminoriadmaiusargumentation(ifalegalnormforbidsonetodoless,thenit
alsoforbidsonetodomore).
M.Lekston