- within Privacy, Technology and Accounting and Audit topic(s)
- in Turkey
Personnel Attendance Tracking System (“PATS”) records refer to electronic or digital workplace records used by employers to monitor and record matters such as employees’ entry and exit times, working hours, overtime, leave periods, absenteeism, and similar employment-related data.
With the integration of technological developments into working life, the question of whether PATS records, which constitute technical data, may be accepted as evidence particularly in employment law proceedings has become increasingly significant. In this context, the fact that such systems are established and controlled by the employer has also raised discussions regarding the impartiality and reliability of these records. As a general rule, PATS records are considered private documents unilaterally created by the employer and, within the scope of the Turkish Code of Civil Procedure (“CPC”), they are considered evidence subject to the court's discretionary assessment.
In its decisions rendered in 2023, the 8th Civil Chamber of the Ankara Regional Court of Appeal held that such records could not be relied upon as evidence on the grounds that they were not secured by means of a timestamp mechanismand were open to external intervention. Accordingly, the Court ruled that the overtime claimsshould be calculated and awarded based on witness statements, and found the first-instance court decisions lawful in this respect.
On the other hand, in its subsequent decisions, the 9th Civil Chamber of the Ankara Regional Court of Appeal adopted a different approach by attributing evidentiary value to the records submitted by the defendant institution. The Court determined the employee’s overtime and weekly holiday claimsby taking into account the recorded entry and exit times for the periods covered by such records and dismissed the parties’ appeals on these grounds with final effect.
In light of the above, an application was filed for the resolution of the discrepancy between the decisions of the Regional Courts of Appeal. As a result of this application, in its decision dated 15 January 2026, the 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation examined the evidentiary nature and probative value of digital PATS records and ruled that such records may be relied upon as evidence provided that certain conditions are satisfied. Accordingly, the Court of Cassation resolved the inconsistency between the decisions of the Regional Courts of Appeal.
In its decision numbered 2025/8898 Case N. and 2026/288 Decision N., the Court of Cassation further clarified this issue by stating that: “Since both parties relied on workplace records as evidence, the digital data regarding the employee’s computer system login and logout records (log records) as well as fingerprint attendance system records should be examined by an expert appointed with the authority to conduct an on-site review at the defendant employer’s headquarters. A detailed, comprehensive, and a verifiable and judicially reviewable expert report should be obtained regarding whether any intervention or alteration has been made to the system. If it is determined by the court that no intervention has been made to the system, the case should be concluded by relying on the records submitted by the defendant employer for the relevant period. However, if any intervention is detected, whether overtime work was performed and whether the employee worked on national holidays and general public holidays should be determined based on witness statements.”
Accordingly, as established by the decisions of the Supreme Court, PATS records cannot be automatically deemed as conclusive evidence. In the event of a potential dispute:
- The PATS records and digital records submitted by the parties should be examined by an expert possessing the necessary technical expertise;
- A detailed, comprehensive, and explanatory expert report should be obtained regarding whether the system has been subject to any intervention or alteration; and
- If it is determined that no intervention has been made to the system, the dispute should be resolved by relying on the PATS records submitted by the employer.
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.
