Ji Yaohua joined Shanghai Cultural Co., Ltd. on March 4, 2019 as a clerk, and the two sides signed a labor contract.
On April 16, 2020, Ji Yaohua and the company signed the "Employee Lift Labor Contract Agreement", and the two parties negotiated to terminate the labor contract.
The content of the agreement contains:
Party A: Culture Co., Ltd.
Party B: Ji Yaohua …
Both parties A and B, in accordance with the "Labor Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China" and other relevant laws and regulations, have reached the following agreements after friendly consultation on the termination of the labor contract between the two:
First, this agreement is formulated on the basis of Party B and Party A’s fair, reasonable, legal, and voluntary basis.
2. Both parties A confirmed that the labor contract was canceled on April 16, 2020, and the rights and obligations of the two parties ended.
Fourth, Party A agrees to pay the corresponding expenses of the labor contract after Party B properly handled all the resignation and work transfer procedures:
1. According to regulations, Party A will pay 1,6789 yuan for Party B’s economic compensation costs at one time
7. Since April 17, 2020, Party B has no relationship with Party A, and there is no entanglement between the two parties.
After the agreement was signed, the company paid the corresponding amount in accordance with the agreement, and the agreement had been fulfilled.
On July 7, 2020, Ji Yaohua applied for arbitration on the grounds of her pregnancy before leaving, and asked to restore labor relations. The Arbitration Commission made a decision on August 20, 2020, and did not support Ji Yaohua’s arbitration request.
Ji Yaohua did not accept it and sued to the court.
The reason for Ji Yaohua is as follows:
I joined the company on March 4, 2019. After a period of time, I suddenly appeared in the symptoms of physical discomfort that affected normal work. Because my physical condition has not improved, I thought I could not continue to be qualified for the original job.The relationship and signed the "Employee Lift Labor Contract Agreement".
After the further diagnosis of the hospital, I learned that I was pregnant at the end of January 2020, which caused a normal pregnancy response with physical discomfort. This caused me to have significant misunderstandings when signing the lifting agreement.The labor relationship between the two sides.
Ji Yaohua provides the following evidence:
During the trial, Ji Yaohua provided a medical record, and wanted to prove that he was pregnant at the end of January 2020.The records of the clinic show that Ji Yaohua had been discontinued on January 15th and March 24, 2020, and was diagnosed as a pregnancy state on June 6 of the same year.
Ji Yaohua said that she did not find her pregnancy when she was diagnosed in January 2020 and March of the same year. It was not until June 2020 that Ji Yaohua found that she was pregnant.Patient, so there is a major misunderstanding of the Ji Yaohua Department when signing the agreement, and the labor relationship between the two sides should be restored.
Company defense opinion:
The company argued that the "Employee Lisestyle of the Labor Contract Agreement" signed by the two parties is the true expression of the two parties, and there is no situation of fraud, coercion or danger of ride, and the agreement is legally valid.
The law does not stipulate that the employer shall not negotiate with the pregnant female employee to terminate the labor contract.The proposition of fulfilling the labor contract has no legal basis.
The court believes that according to regulations, the employer and the workers will negotiate and can terminate the labor contract.
Labor and employers agree on or terminated related procedures on labor contracts, paying salary compensation, overtime pay, economic compensation or compensation, etc., do not violate the compulsory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and there is no fraud, coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion or coercion.Those who are in danger should be valid.
As for Ji Yaohua’s complaint on restoring labor relations, the court believes that the "Employee Lift the Labor Contract Agreement" signed by the two parties is a true expression of the two parties, and does not violate the compulsory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and there are no fraud or coercion.Or the situation of taking people should be valid, and both parties should be fulfilled according to the contract.
As a person who has a fully civilian behavior ability, Ji Yaohua does not have an error understanding of the content and legal consequences of the meaning of the meaning when signing the termination agreement. Its misjudgment of the fact that his pregnancy facts do not know the fact that he misjudge his own situation.It belongs to major misunderstandings stipulated in the law.Therefore, Ji Yaohua did not know that he was pregnant and was a major misunderstanding as a major misunderstanding when he signed the "Employee Lissing Labor Contract Agreement". He advocated the restoration of the labor relationship. The court will not accept it.
In summary, Ji Yaohua’s lawsuit request for restoring the labor relations between the two parties did not support this court due to lack of basis.Accordingly, in accordance with the provisions of Article 2, paragraph 1 of the Labor Contract Law of the People’s Republic of China, the verdict is as follows: reject Ji Yaohua’s lawsuit request.
The case acceptance fee was reduced by 5 yuan, which was borne by Ji Yaohua Ji Yaohua.
Case number: (2020) Shanghai 01112 Minchu 38585 (the name of the party)