An employee claimed social benefits despite the fact that the engagement agreements specifically stated that no employer-employee relationship exists.
The Labor Court held that the manner in which the parties defined their relationship is not the only indicator regarding whether employer-employee relationship existed.
In order to decide whether employer-employee relationship exist the Court will apply the "integration test" – whether the person was integrated in the company. In this case such test was not fulfilled because the company did not appointed another employee instead of such "employee" after the termination of the relationship and because the remuneration paid was significantly higher than the norm. Additionally, in this case there was the tender which explicitly stated that no employer-employee relationship will exist and any other determination of the Court may harm the equality between the tender offerors and actually change the conditions of the tender. Thus, under all circumstances (including, but not only, the manner in which the parties expressly defined their relationship) no employer-employee relationship existed.