{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","provider_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/","author_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","author_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/","title":"TT 2025:17 - Asian lep\u00e4\u00e4m\u00e4\u00e4n j\u00e4tt\u00e4minen","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"fA6nlc4ORs\"><a href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/tt-202517-asian-lepaamaan-jattaminen-2\/\">TT 2025:17 &#8211; Asian lep\u00e4\u00e4m\u00e4\u00e4n j\u00e4tt\u00e4minen<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/tt-202517-asian-lepaamaan-jattaminen-2\/embed\/#?secret=fA6nlc4ORs\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"\u300a TT 2025:17 &#8211; Asian lep\u00e4\u00e4m\u00e4\u00e4n j\u00e4tt\u00e4minen \u300b\u2014Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" data-secret=\"fA6nlc4ORs\" 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":"Kysymys siit\u00e4, oliko ty\u00f6tuomioistuimella toimivalta tutkia kanteen suoritusvaatimukset ja vastaajien esitt\u00e4m\u00e4 kuittausv\u00e4ite. Lis\u00e4ksi kysymys asian lep\u00e4\u00e4m\u00e4\u00e4n j\u00e4tt\u00e4misest\u00e4, kunnes k\u00e4r\u00e4j\u00e4oikeudessa vireill\u00e4 oleva asia oli lainvoimaisesti ratkaistu. Kantaja oli vaatinut ty\u00f6nantajan tuomitsemista hyvityssakkoon ty\u00f6ehtosopimuksen tieten rikkomisen perusteella. Koska kanteessa esitetyt suoritusvaatimukset riippuivat edell\u00e4 mainitusta oikeudenk\u00e4ynnist\u00e4 ty\u00f6tuomioistuimessa annetun lain 1 \u00a7:n 1 momentissa tarkoitetusta riidan ratkaisusta, ty\u00f6tuomioistuin katsoi..."}