[ad_1]
Š. Jovaišaitė, who was called a great professional babysitter, but was caught in some kind of professional crisis after a public conflict with a famous woman, is forced to explain herself in court.
The girl worked as a nanny for A. Jagelavičiūtė for several years and became almost a friend of the family. in the spring, a black and rather mysterious cat ran among them.
The conflict, especially its origins, speaks of fragments, more clues than facts, with both sides presenting very different versions, so even the essence can be very difficult to understand.
It is so clear that Š.Jovaišaitė’s participation in the LNK program KK2, in which the babysitter allegedly “said something”, could have become the spark for the ongoing interpretation of relationships. Š.Jovaišaitė herself later claimed that she said “nothing” that could offend or offend her then employer. On the contrary, before the interview with its organizers, the condition that it would be wrong to speak specifically about Agnė and his family was discussed.
For his part, A. Jagelavičiūtė has spoken extensively about this conflict on his Facebook profile 5 months ago, but the story of the woman, full of grievances, malicious words, comments, still does not seem to answer all the riddles of this story. Eventually the dispute moved to court.
The plaintiff A.Jagelavičiūtė, who still appears in court documents with the last name of the former spouse (Volkienė), did not appear in person at the Vilnius City District Court hearing on Wednesday, but sent a lawyer. At that time, the defendant went to court and Š.Jovaišaitė was accompanied by a lawyer representing her interests.
Kristina Lysionok, the host of the trial, urged the parties not to file a lawsuit. At the end of the hearing, the judge asked if the participants did not see the possibility of concluding the case amicably.
“I already want to live in peace. So, I apologize to Agnė, and we end in peace! ”The nanny, the accused Šarūnė, reacted emotionally to such an opportunity.
However, a declaration of peace somewhat contradicts the position expressed by the parties. At the preparatory meeting, Aleksandras Doroševas, a lawyer hired by the nanny, came up with the idea that while preparing to defend Š. than vice versa.
The presiding judge said, “Are you saying you are going to file a counterclaim?”
Lawyer A. Doroševas replied in the negative, but stated that he believed that it was the peace treaty, and not the satisfaction of the statement by A. Jagelavičiūtė and his lawyer, that it would be the fairest and most logical ending of the story. Antanas Damulis, the famous stylist’s lawyer, did not object to this in principle, stating unexpectedly that if the agreement was reached peacefully, his client would withdraw the financial claim in this case, to compensate for the possible monetary damage. It would be enough if the defendant admitted the mistake, perhaps he would apologize again, and that is all.
However, already after the hearing, giving an interview to the media, lawyer A. Damulis corrected to some extent this idea regarding the denial of monetary compensation. He said that specifically this condition would still have to be discussed by both parties when the final content of the peace agreement was agreed.
VIDEO: The adubakate of A. Jagelavičiūtė did not comment on the reasons for the conflict: “We want to make peace and resolve all differences with peace.”
Judge K. Lysionok announced that the preparations for the case of A.Jagelavičiūtė and Š.Jovaišait se were postponed. Both parties have time to discuss and present the agreement to the court. There are two possible scenarios for the case. If the contract is drawn up, the judge will probably just verify and approve the document.
VIDEO: Š.Jovaišaitė’s lawyer: “The parties were not satisfied with the actions and speeches of the other party”
However, if there are nuances on which the lawyers and the two women cannot agree, the court could continue to prepare the case and examine A. Jagelavičiūtė’s claim on the merits.
[ad_2]
