{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","provider_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","author_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","author_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","title":"Helsingin HO 11.6.2024 916 - Ty\u00f6ehtosopimus","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"FnfouGCuiC\"><a href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/helsingin-ho-11-6-2024-916-tyoehtosopimus\/\">Helsingin HO 11.6.2024 916 &#8212; Ty\u00f6ehtosopimus<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/helsingin-ho-11-6-2024-916-tyoehtosopimus\/embed\/#?secret=FnfouGCuiC\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"\u00abHelsingin HO 11.6.2024 916 &#8212; Ty\u00f6ehtosopimus\u00bb &#8212; Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" data-secret=\"FnfouGCuiC\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/\/# sourceURL=https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-includes\/js\/wp-embed.min.js\n<\/script>\n","description":"Hovioikeus katsoi, ettei vuokraty\u00f6t\u00e4 koskeva ty\u00f6sopimuslain 2 luvun 9 \u00a7:n 1 momentti sanamuotonsa tai tarkoituksensa mukaisesti tulkiten edellyt\u00e4, ett\u00e4 vuokraajayrityst\u00e4 sitovan ty\u00f6ehtosopimuksen olisi nimenomaisesti oltava vuokraty\u00f6t\u00e4 koskeva tullakseen sovellettavaksi vuokraty\u00f6ntekij\u00f6iden ty\u00f6suhteissa. Lis\u00e4ksi hovioikeus katsoi, ett\u00e4 vuokraty\u00f6direktiivi\u00e4 kansallisesti t\u00e4yt\u00e4nt\u00f6\u00f6npantaessa ei lains\u00e4\u00e4d\u00e4nt\u00f6\u00f6n ollut sis\u00e4llytetty s\u00e4\u00e4ntely\u00e4, jota olisi mahdollista tulkita direktiivin ja unionin tuomioistuimen sit\u00e4 koskevan tulkintak\u00e4yt\u00e4nn\u00f6n edellytt\u00e4min..."}