The labour law does not have a specific provision on reciprocal redundancy agreements. However, Supreme Court decisions have repeatedly emphasized that reciprocal termination agreements, since they are in accordance with a „cancellation contract,“ are governed by the general provisions of the law of obligations with respect to legal status. When an employment contract is terminated for any reason, all unpaid annual leave is paid to the worker in accordance with section 59 of the Labour Act. Note that „cessation“ is not a necessary condition for granting paid annual leave. The employer is required to pay unused annual paid leave in all circumstances of termination of an employment contract, including as part of a reciprocal termination agreement. Main certificate: if registered, the number of the document concerned must be identical to the number listed on the REIT, in accordance with the reciprocal agreement. The most important condition for the performance of a valid reciprocal termination contract is the existence of „reasonable performance criteria“ arising from the court decision. The Supreme Court applies the validity of the reciprocal termination contract to the existence of a reasonable benefit from the worker`s point of view. The main reason for the Supreme Court`s „reasonable utility“ criteria in reciprocal termination agreements is that, since the worker is granted termination of the employment contract by the employer with severance pay and severance pay, the preference for another method, which is not more advantageous, cannot be considered appropriate at the normal stage of his life. This is why, in several cases, and particularly in cases where the request for a reciprocal termination agreement is made by an employer, the Supreme Court expects, in addition to the legal rights allegedly paid in the event of dismissal by the employer and not by a reciprocal termination agreement, certain additional benefits equal to „reasonable benefits“. Several Supreme Court decisions have invalidated reciprocal termination agreements, effectively terminating the use of „employer termination“ in the absence of additional payments or benefits and, as a result, related re-employment remedies have been accepted by the Supreme Court.
On the other hand, when a worker is subject to a reciprocity contract, the payment of legal rights under a reciprocal termination contract – which would not have been paid in the event of ordinary termination – is considered a „reasonable benefit“. As a result, reciprocal termination agreements executed using such a method are generally considered valid. Legal compensation related to the termination of an employment contract (i.e. severance pay and severance pay) does not in principle apply to valid termination contracts. Nevertheless, the parties can agree on another plan for the payment of such compensation. In addition, when considering the „reasonable benefit“ criteria, the Supreme Court ensures that additional compensation and payments are made as a factor affecting the validity of a reciprocal termination agreement. The validity of the mutual termination contract does not depend on some form. Therefore, a reciprocal termination agreement can be executed either explicitly or implicitly, orally or in writing.