Principio in dubio pro operario
in dubio pro reo
In dubio pro operario is a Latin locution, which expresses the legal principle that in case of doubt in the hermeneutics of the norm, the worker (operator) will be favored. It is an interpretative principle of labor law, which could be translated as «in case of doubt in favor of the worker».
If a judicial claim for dismissal is filed, the employer may allege voluntary abandonment of the worker. It may also happen that the worker wants to leave the company, inform the employer of his resignation, but not leave a written record of it, and then claim the dismissal.
The company sends a reinstatement telegram on the same day of the hearing, the dilemma is whether or not this telegram is valid to establish the claimant’s intention to terminate. The answer is negative, since it was understood that if this had been the company’s intention, it should have expressly stated so at the hearing.
19. Insta también a todos los Estados miembros, teniendo en cuenta lo anterior, a que apliquen la totalidad de las normas sobre salud y seguridad en el trabajo de manera leal y operando bajo el principio de que, en caso de duda, la
19. Asimismo, insta a todos los Estados miembros a que, a la luz de lo anterior, apliquen fielmente todas las normas sobre salud y seguridad en el trabajo sobre la base del principio de que, en caso de duda, la
de que la Comisión había establecido que la recurrente había participado en una infracción única, compleja y continuada, sin que ni siquiera existieran pruebas capaces de establecer la existencia y la duración de la infracción.
una decisión de fondo y derivada del derecho a la tutela judicial efectiva, un examen más detallado de las distintas alegaciones presentadas por la recurrente, así como de su respuesta, permitirá desentrañar su verdadero sentido.
Que seamos capaces de configurar tipos penales que no sean farragosos, porque si el juzgador entiende que existen dificultades siempre producirá el sistema de in dubio pro reo y es necesario, en este aspecto, que no perdamos la ocasión. europarl.europa.eu
in dubio pro reo
This paper analyzes the scope of the in dubio pro operario principle in the appreciation of evidence, the limits of its application and the link between sound criticism and the protective principle; also, the evidentiary and informal activity of the Labor Judge and the techniques or guidelines that could be applied with this principle. It is a documentary investigation in which it is shown that the principle in dubio pro operario leads to clarify the doubtful facts favoring the worker for being the legally weak. Consequently, there should be no limits in the application of the mentioned principle, since the Judge must have the full conviction and make the fair appreciation at the moment of valuing the evidence under his logical reasoning. It is concluded that the judge, when applying this principle, must take into account the maxims of experience, the identity of things under intuition and sound criticism. Also, he must reason the facts and circumstances, applying inductive, abductive and deductive logic in the same order, as well as intuition in the appreciation of the evidence. It is proposed the modification of Article 10 of the Organic Labor Procedure Law and the creation of a multidisciplinary team for the justice operator to clarify the doubts that may arise and to serve as a complement for the ruling, helping to make the sentence fairer.
Principio in dubio pro operario en línea
In the following paragraphs we will analyze the inequality generated by the «in dubio pro operari» principle and the procedural imbalance that this means, forcing the judge to set aside the impartiality that is proper to him.
Even considering the existence of a better position of the employer with respect to the worker, we cannot allow the deliberate existence of an inequality in favor of any of the parties in the substantive law and much less in the procedural law.
In accordance with what has been said, we will briefly develop the role of the judge in the process in general, the protective principle and the principle in dubio pro operari. The issue raised could be considered basic and naive because it ignores the inequality that is intended between the parties in the process, but we understand that it is of vital importance for the law to avoid unbalancing the position of the parties beforehand when it comes to analyzing it in order to recover the balance that we believe to be natural.
We understand that the protective principle in favor of the supposedly weaker party becomes excessive. Accepting that the substance of Section 9 of the Labor Contract Law lies in the purpose of providing an acceptable solution for cases of insurmountable doubt as to the veracity of the parties’ statements, but in favor of the party that, as we have said beforehand, is the weaker party in the relationship and to which this procedural advantage is granted in order, as we have said, to ensure the protective purpose of the law and the law on the merits. This advantage makes the protection in favor of the employee excessive, which violates the employer’s right of defense and eliminates procedural equality between the parties.