The parties to an employment contract may terminate the contract by mutual agreement. Termination of employ­ment under Article 30 § 1(1) of the Labour Code, on the one hand, raises numerous questions and doubts in practice, and on the other hand, is not a frequent topic of discussion in the literature and case law. This dissonance means that the discussed method of terminating an employment con­tract requires attention. In particular, it is unclear wheth­er the mutual agreement on the date of termination of the employment contract is a necessary provision, or wheth­er it can be assumed that in each case its absence means consent to the termination of the obligation on the date of conclusion of the agreement. Similarly problematic is the transfer of the regulation concerning defects in declarations of intent to labour law. The question arises as to whether this construction should be applied directly or whether its modification is permissible, and if so, to what extent. The Supreme Court has spoken on the above-mentioned issues, but its statements are, on the one hand, innovative and, on the other hand, not necessarily consistent with each other. It seems that there is a need to review and organise them.

The right to equal treatment for equal performance of the same duties and the prohibition of discrimination in employment constitute fundamental principles of employment law. The legislator has defined them in a straightforward manner. However, the consequences of their violation have been defined rather vaguely. The Supreme Court jurisprudence and representatives of the literature interpret the impact of Article 18 § 3 of the Labour Code and Article 183d of the Labour Code in a different way. Moreover, it remains unclear to what extent it is permissible to draw on the rules of liability set out in the Civil Code. The legal nature of liability itself is also contentious – the views of legal academics operating in the field of labour law point to its public law nature. Indicated doubts inspire to undertake stabilising measures, with the primary objective being to find a model that reconciles opposing views.

The prohibition of termination of an employment contract one month after the employer has received information about the reasons justifying it is based on a complex relationship. On the one hand, it constitutes a guarantee for the employee, whereas on the other hand, it assumes that the employer is adequately aware of the circumstances of the employee's reprehensible behaviour. This correlation gives rise to numerous controversies. Consequently, it makes it much more difficult to develop a uniform pattern of interpretation.

termination of an employment contract, protection of an employee, obtaining information by an employer