The judgment under review concerns the issue of termination of an employment contract by mutual consent. Its thesis assumes that the conclusion of an agreement to terminate an employment contract may occur as a result of an offer made by one party and accepted by the other party. If the offer to terminate the employment contract by the employee has not been made in direct contact with the employer, the offer ceases to be binding at the end of the time during which the employee could, in the ordinary course of business, have received a reply sent without undue delay. In the opinion of the glossator, both the thesis of the judgment and the legal reasoning cited to justify it deserve approval.

The article discusses an issue significant both from a theoretical and practical point of view, whether in a case of an employee's claims for unjustified or unlawful termination of employment, brought against the employer under Article 415 of the Polish Civil Code (in connection with Article 300 of the Labour Code) and not under the Polish Labour Code, the competent court composition is the one defined in Article 47 para. 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (i.e. one judge composition), or rather in Article 47 para. 2(1)(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure (i.e. lay judges composition). There is certain divergence of views on this issue in the judicature of the Supreme Court and common courts. As it seems, the prevailing position is that a case concerning such claims is to be examined by a court composed of one judge.

The issues discussed in the article consider whether the provision of art. 130 § 2 of the Labour Code applies to educators at educational establishments working in no-summer, no-winter holidays system (Monday through Sunday 40 hours per week) for whom a territorial self-government unit is the governing body, and if under art.42c (4) of the Teacher’s Charter, such an educator is given a day off for working on a holiday, art. 130 § 3 of the Labour Code also applies.