An Important Constitutional Court Decision On The Right Of Access To A Court In Reinstatement Cases

In its decision dated 3 March 2026 (Application No. 2022/82055), the Constitutional Court of Türkiye (“Court”) held that dismissing a reinstatement action on the ground that the reinstatement claim had not been submitted to mandatory mediation – despite the final mediation record expressly referring to the reinstatement dispute – imposed a disproportionate restriction on the right of access to a court. The decision was published in the Official Gazette dated 21 September 2026 and numbered 33377.

a) Background of the Dispute:

• The applicant, who worked as a private security officer, filed a reinstatement action following the termination of his employment contract. The first-instance court held the termination invalid and ordered reinstatement.
• On appeal, the Regional Court of Appeal dismissed the action on procedural grounds, finding that the mandatory mediation requirement had not been satisfied in respect of reinstatement because the relevant option had not been marked on the mediation application form and the wording in the final record was considered insufficient.

b) Assessment of the Constitutional Court:

• The Court noted that mediation is a mandatory precondition for certain employment disputes, but emphasized that procedural requirements must not make access to justice impossible or excessively difficult.
• In the case at hand, the mediation application form listed various employment receivables and termination-related claims, while the final record dated 24 February 2020 expressly stated that reinstatement had been discussed during mediation.
• The Court stressed that the final mediation record is, in principle, prepared on the basis of the parties’ statements. Treating reinstatement as outside the mediation process despite its express inclusion in the final record amounted to an excessively formalistic interpretation of the procedural precondition.
• Accordingly, the dismissal of the action without an examination on the merits imposed an excessive burden on the applicant and violated the right of access to a court protected under Article 36 of the Constitution.

c) Outcome and Practical Significance:

• The Court found a violation of the right of access to a court and ordered that a copy of the decision be sent to the 15th Civil Chamber of the İzmir Regional Court of Appeal for a retrial aimed at remedying the consequences of the violation.
• The applicant’s compensation claim was rejected, while a total of TRY 40,664.10 in costs and attorney’s fees was awarded to the applicant.
• The decision highlights that, when determining the scope of a dispute submitted to mandatory mediation, the assessment should not be confined to boxes or selections on the application form; the mediation process as a whole, and particularly the content of the final record, should also be considered.