PROCEDURAL VIOLATIONS IN THE TERMINATION OF AN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT WITH AN EMPLOYEE AS A SOURCE OF LEGAL RISKS FOR THE EMPLOYER: BASED ON JUDICIAL PRACTICE IN THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN

2026

Full text Open access: Hybrid Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.54596/2958-0048-2026-1-186-198
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

The article is devoted to a comprehensive analysis of procedural violations committed by employers in the Republic of Kazakhstan when terminating employment contracts, which are examined as an independent source of legal risks. The relevance of the study is determined by the fact that a significant number of employers lose labor disputes not due to the absence of substantive grounds for dismissal, but as a result of failure to comply with the formal procedural requirements of labor legislation. Based on an examination of judicial practice and the explanations of the Supreme Court, the paper identifies and systematizes typical errors made by employers. The main groups of violations include: premature termination of an employment contract at the employee’s initiative without his or her consent, violations of the procedure and time limits for imposing disciplinary sanctions, errors in the composition of disciplinary commissions, as well as failure to prove damage in cases of dismissal for loss of trust. The article provides a detailed analysis of the legal consequences of such violations, including the unconditional reinstatement of the employee, payment of wages for the period of forced absence from work, and reputational costs for the employer. As measures to minimize these risks, the author proposes the introduction of an internal procedural compliance system, the standardization of dismissal algorithms, and mandatory preventive legal control over personnel decisions.