Ms Marina Vassiliou

Marina Vassiliou

Updates

Litigation

Supreme Court rules that monetary benefit given to employee constitutes salary and must be paid
Cyprus | 18 August 2020

The Supreme Court recently overruled a first-instance decision which had acquitted the respondent and its director of charges concerning the non-payment of monthly salaries to monthly paid staff. The Supreme Court's approach appears to be a reasonable one. It illustrates the need to ensure employees' right to receive their salary and the benefits to which they are entitled on the basis of their employment agreement.

First-instance courts must evaluate testimony adduced during hearings
Cyprus | 26 May 2020

In a recent appeal, the Supreme Court ruled that the first-instance court could not ignore testimony adduced during a hearing without having evaluated it. In its decision, the Supreme Court stressed that where there is a disagreement as to the substantive facts of a case, the evaluation of testimony is the cornerstone of any decision. The absence of judgement as to whether a substantial witness has told the truth will render the court's decision incomplete.

Court procedure for evicting defaulting tenants amended
Cyprus | 17 March 2020

The law on property rental in Cyprus appears to have been unfairly weighted in favour of tenants for some time, as defaulting tenants have been legally entitled to remain in a property without paying their legally due rent until the hearing of an application for recovery of possession before the Rent Control Court. However, the recent amendment of the Rent (Control) Law seeks to resolve the problem of landlords who have had to deal with such tenants.

Guarantee for faithful execution of tenancy lease agreement does not cover statutory tenancy period
Cyprus | 17 December 2019

In a recent appeal case, the Supreme Court ruled that the wording of a guarantee signed in respect of a tenancy lease agreement did not fall within the context of an explicit commitment to cover the statutory tenancy as well. Therefore, it could not be concluded that the parties intended to extend the guarantee to this form of tenancy and that the guarantor was committed to pay the rent during said period.