Konkurenčna klavzula

Sadar, Erika (author), Tičar, Luka (mentor)

Predmet magistrske diplomske naloge je konkurenčna klavzula v delovnih razmerjih. Gre za obliko prepovedi konkurence, poleg konkurenčne prepovedi. Termin konkurenčna klavzula je sedaj ustaljen in označuje pogodbeno prepoved konkurence, ki delavca zavezuje po prenehanju delovnega razmerja, medtem ko konkurenčna prepoved ali zakonska prepoved konkurence velja med delovnim razmerjem. Prvič je bila z zakonom na našem pravnem območju urejena z ZDR-90, ki je materijo uredil v treh odstavkih 7. člena. Zaradi pomanjkljivosti, ker zakon ni enakomerno obremenil pogodbenih strank, je bil predmet ustavnopravne presoje, ki je razveljavilo dva odstavka omenjenega člena. Konkurenčna klavzula je določilo v pogodbi o zaposlitvi, ki delavca zavezuje po prenehanju delovnega razmerja, če le-to preneha na enega izmed določnih načinov, ki so predpisani v ZDR-1. Je institut, ki varuje delodajalčeve legitimne interese, njegov know-how in posega v ustavne pravice delavca. Zaradi tega je delavec upravičen do nadomestila, če njegov zaslužek zaradi spoštovanja konkurenčne klavzule ni primerljiv delavčevi prejšnji plači. Institut je urejen v ZDR-1, ki predpisuje vse pomembne elemente konkurenčne klavzule, katere pa morata stranki ob sklenitvi pogodbe o zaposlitvi podrobno urediti. V zakonu pa ni urejena pogodbena kazen, ki je civilnopravna sankcija v primeru nespoštovanja konkurenčne klavzule s strani delavca. Zaradi neurejenosti v zakonu, je bila pogodbena kazen velikokrat predmet sodne presoje. Vrhovno sodišče s svojo ustaljeno sodno prakso narekuje nižjim sodiščem, da je pogodbena kazen v teh primerih dopustna. Sodna praksa je bila tekom razvoja instituta in še sedaj, izredno pomembna, predvsem po razveljavitvi 5. in 6. odstavka 7. člena ZDR-90, ko je na tem mestu nastala pravna praznina. S pregledom sodne prakse ugotovimo, da je največ težav v praksi pri določitvi primernega nadomestila, pri dopustitvi in višini pogodbene kazni ter pri dopustitvi odstopa od konkurenčne klavzule s strani delodajalca, čeprav je zakon glede zadnjega povsem jasen.

• Language: Slovenian
• Keywords: Konkurenčna klavzula, konkurenčna prepoved, Zakon o delovnih razmerjih, nadomestilo, pogodbena kazen, odškodninska odgovornost, svoboda dela, svobodna gospodarska pobuda, pogodba o zaposlitvi, prenehanje konkurenčne klavzule.
• Work type: Master's thesis/paper
• Organization: PF - Faculty of Law
• Year: 2019
• PID: 20.500.12556/RUL-108506
• COBISS.SI-ID: 16857937
• Publication date in RUL: 05.07.2019

Secondary language

• Language: English
• Title: A Non-compete Clause

Abstract

The subject of this MA thesis is a non-compete clause in a contractual employment relationship. It is a type of non-compete obligation that exists besides the prohibition on competition. The term non-compete clause is nowadays a well-established term which designates a contractual non-compete obligation. It restricts the worker after the termination of the employment relationship, whereas the prohibition on competition or legal non-compete obligation takes effect during the employment relationship. In our legal area, the non-compete clause was implemented for the first time with the Employment Relationship Act of 1990 (Act-90) which regulated the subject in three paragraphs of Article 7. As the law did not encumber the contracting parties equally by reason of its weaknesses, it became the subject of constitutional judgement. For this reason, the two paragraphs of Article 7 were abrogated. The non-competition clause is a provision in the contract of employment which obligates the worker after the suspension of employment relationship if the latter is terminated in accordance with regulations as laid down in the Employment Relationship Act of 2013 (Act-1). It is an institution which protects the employer's legitimate interests, their know-how, and encroaches upon the institutional rights of the worker. In consequence, the worker is entitled to wage compensation if the current wage is not equivalent to the previous one in observance to the non-compete clause. The institution is prescribed in the Act-1 and includes all the most significant elements of the non-compete clause which must be agreed upon by the contracting parties prior to the conclusion of the employment contract. The Act does not regulate the contractual penalty, which serves as a civil sanction in case of disrespect of the non-compete clause of the worker. As a result of unregulated law, the penalty became the subject of judicial review many a time. With standard case law, the Supreme Court ordains the lower courts that the contractual penalty is admissible in such cases. Ever since the institute's development until now, the case law was of paramount importance, especially after the cancellation of Paragraphs 5 and 6 of Article 7 of the Act-90, which left behind a legal vacuum. By reviewing the case law, we come to a conclusion that the majority of difficulties arise from granting and determining adequate compensation, calculating the scale of the penalty payment, and allowing the resignation from the said clause by the employer, irrespective of the law’s clarity and transparency about the matter.

• Keywords: non-compete clause, prohibition on competition, Employment Relationship Act, compensation, penalty, liability for damage, freedom of work, free economic initiative, employment contract, termination of non-compete clause.