საერთო ცხელი ხაზი +995 577 07 05 63
LABOUR RIGHTS /
Statement
Another employee dismissed as a result of Tsulukiani’s staff cleansing won a court case
Another citizen, Guga Gogadze, dismissed due to staff cleansing conducted by Tea Tsulukiani, won a labour dispute in the Tbilisi Court of Appeal on October 26, 2022. Social Justice Center protects his interests before the court.
The Court of Appeal annulled the judgment of the City Court delivered on May 23, 2022, by which the claims of Guga Gogadze were not satisfied. According to the new judgment by the Court of Appeal, the January 2022 order of the General Director of the National Agency for the Protection of Cultural Heritage of Georgia regarding the dismissal of Guga Gogadze from the position of chief specialist of procurement service was declared void. In addition, the court also ordered the agency to compensate lost earnings to the dismissed employee from the date of dismissal up to the date when the final court judgment declaring void the employer’s decision on terminating the employment agreement is enforced. Moreover, Gogadze demanded compensation before the court because it was impossible to reinstate him in his position at this stage. The court partially satisfied this request and additionally ordered the agency to pay 3 thousand Gel to the appellant.
As a reminder, Guga Gogadze is one of the 70 employees from the culture sector who became victims of the mass cleansing after the appointment of Tea Tsulukiani as the Minister of Culture. This judgment delivered by the court regarding the dismissals mentioned above is the second precedent, which will be of paramount importance for the labor disputes of other dismissed workers in the field of culture. The Tbilisi City Court will consider these cases in the coming months.
Social Justice Center and partner organizations continue to provide legal support to illegally dismissed employees of the National Agency for the Protection of Cultural Heritage and the Museum. Social Justice Center is engaged in the legal representation of 10 cases of this type, only two of which have resulted in court judgments. in both cases, the order of dismissal was invalidated, and the defendants were ordered to pay lost earnings and compensation determined by the court.
