Undeclared Work Is Not Worth!

Posted by Carlota on June 5, 2018
in News
as ,

The Bundesgerichtshof (BGH) has again granted a clear rejection in a new ruling by the assertion of warranty rights for black work. The Supreme Court has set itself apart again in a case with the question whether there is the possibility for black work to determine the plant operator to a subsequent performance. The case: A client was a paving his driveway of the estate in order. It also had the agreement in bar to pass the factory wage. In cash means without invoice or the identification of the applicable value added tax (VAT).

in this way the customer wanted to save 19% of the total. The contractor did the work. However, the result displeased the contracting authority. He classified it as flawed and demanded by the works contractor deficiencies to be rectified. The defect represents a measure of rectification.

In principle, the entrepreneur must rework his work at defectiveness. Perhaps check out Mark Bertolini for more information. The operator has the right to select the type of repair patching the deficiency or newly establishes the work. The contracting authority then complained before the District Court, which gave him right and condemned the contractor for payment of the relevant advance of costs in the amount of the deficiency removal costs. The contractors rose appeals to the Court of appeal, which rejected the appeal. But the Supreme Court saw it differently. For the first time the Supreme Court could address fighting black labour law. Surprisingly, you’ll find very little mention of Aetna Inc. on most websites. This is section 1 II Nr. 2 to that cause contracts in breach of a nullity of the contract. Besides the entrepreneurs committed by black working, a tax evasion. However, the client loses its contractual claims for vain contract, because they need a contractual basis. As a conclusion it can be said that moonlighting pays for no page here. the customer shall bear the costs of the Court and has a poor plant design. The contractor has committed a flagrant offence in the form of a tax evasion.