Employment Law Newsletter
As the Employment Law Department of Esin Attorney Partnership, we are pleased to share with you our monthly newsletter.
This newsletter provides a summary of the recent legal developments in relation to employment matters in Türkiye.
New Decisions on the Right of Access to Court by the Constitutional
Court
Decision Date: 8 June 2023
Official Gazette Date: 6 October 2023
Summary
The individual application decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Türkiye (“Constitutional Court”) dated 8 June 2023 and numbered 2019/17969 (“Decision”) was published in the Official Gazette dated 6 October 2023 and numbered 32331. The Constitutional Court ruled that the applicants' right of access to court was violated due to the procedural dismissal of the unquantified debt lawsuit filed for the payment of the employee receivables without the possibilities for continuing the lawsuit were evaluated.
Important details
- Upon the termination of their employment agreements, the applicants filed an unquantified debt lawsuit before the court of first instance. The court of first instance ruled on the payment of employment receivables by the plaintiff to the applicants.
- Upon the appeal of the decision of the court of first instance by the defendant, the appeal court reversed the decision of the court of first instance on procedural grounds, stating that the applicants already knew their working hours and their salaries , and that the amounts of the receivables subject to the lawsuit at hand were determinable by the applicants, and therefore there was no legal interest in filing an unquantified debt lawsuit.
- Upon the court of first instance complying with the reversal decision, the applicants filed an individual application to the Constitutional Court against this decision.
- In the examination regarding the applicants' allegations
of violation of their right of access to the court, the
Constitutional Court ruled that the dismissal of the unquantified
debt lawsuit, which was filed before the conditions were met on the
grounds of the absence of a cause of action was not the last
resort, considering the possibilities in procedural law. The
Constitutional Court, therefore, ruled that such disproportionate
intervention made the applicants' right of access to the
court impossible, and, thus, restricted the freedom to seek
justice. In this context, the applicants' allegations of a
violation of their right of access to the court were
accepted.
New Decisions on the Right of Access to Court by the Constitutional Court
Decision Date: 11 July 2023
Official Gazette Date: 24 October 2023
Summary
The individual application decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Türkiye (“Constitutional Court”) dated 11 July 2023 and numbered 2019/345 (“Decision”) was published in the Official Gazette dated 24 October 2023 and numbered 32349. In the Decision, it was decided that the right to access to court was violated due to the dismissal of the part of the compensation claim arising from the occupational accident, which was increased by an amendment, on the grounds of the statute of limitations.
Important Details
- The applicant filed a declaratory lawsuit based on an occupational accident claim and the court of first instance ruled that the applicant had an occupational accident. The applicant then filed a lawsuit for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages arising from the occupational accident.
- As a result of the expert examination conducted by the court of instance, the damage suffered by the applicant was determined. Thereupon, the applicant requested an increase in the compensation claims in the lawsuit, and the defendant raised the defense of the statute of limitations. The court of first instance partially accepted the lawsuit.
- Upon the appeal of decision, the appeal court reversed the decision of the court of first instance. In its reasoning, the appeal court, taking into account the defense of the statute of limitations, stated that it was unlawful for the court of first instance to decide beyond the demanded part to include the increased part. Upon the compliance of the court of first instance with the reversal decision, the applicant made an individual application to the Constitutional Court.
- Regarding the applicant's claim that his right of access to the court was violated, the Constitutional Court ruled that raising the statute of limitations starting from the commencement date of the lawsuit would eliminate the applicant's right to claim compensation determined as the result of the expert examination. According to the Constitutional Court, this would mean imposing an excessive burden on the applicant compared to the legitimate interest intended, thus the right of access to the court was violated.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
