EN SUPREME COURT
Law Office
Originally: 2016/5753
The Verdict: 2016/7425
Decision Date: 22.06.2016
LITIGATION FOR EMPLOYMENT RECEIVABLES – STAY IN THE JURISDICTION OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS AT THE ADDRESS OF THE APPLICANT’S PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT
SUMMARY: In the concrete dispute, the plaintiff’s workplace address is ”…/…” and this address is ……….. It is under the jurisdiction of Employment Tribunals. It must be seen and decided in the Employment Tribunal.
(5521 SK Md. 5)
Litigation and Decrees: In business cases between the parties, Istanbul 4. Business and Bakırköy 6. Due to the fact that the Employment Tribunals have separate decisions, all the documents contained in the file sent for the determination of the competent court have been examined.
The case relates to a claim for severance pay, annual leave, overtime and general holiday pay.
Istanbul 4. The Labor Court is a part of Article 5 of the Labor Courts Law No. 5521. in accordance with the article, he made a decision of dismissal on the grounds that the case should be filed in the court of the defendant’s place of settlement or place of work, that the authority in labor proceedings should be based on public order and should be taken into account ex officio.
On the other hand, Bakırköy is 6. The Labor Court, on the other hand, stated that the authority in labor proceedings stems from public order and that Law 5521 numbered 5. according to the article, it should be taken into account ex officio, the case should be filed in the court of the defendant’s settlement or the place where the work is performed, in the concrete dispute, the place where the work is performed is located around the Istanbul jurisdiction, which is the company headquarters.
On the other hand, …, although a lawsuit was filed in the court of the place where the work was performed, a decision of non-duty was made and the place where the plaintiff did his work was “…/…” and this address was around the jurisdiction of the … Court, he made a decision of non-duty on the grounds that it was in the court of the place where the work was performed, arguing that it was in the court of the place where the work was performed.
5 of the Labor Courts Law No. 5521. in the article, the labor courts are designated as competent in labor disputes. According to this, “Every case to be filed in labor courts can be heard in the court of the place where the case was filed according to the Turkish Civil Code, as well as in the authorized court of the workplace where the employee sees his job. The contract contrary to these is not considered valid.” the judgment is contained.
The rule of duty in Labor Courts is in accordance with the rules of duty of the Code of Civil Procedure, and in addition, the courts of the place where the work is performed, in other words, the place where the workplace is located, are authorized.
A lawsuit to be filed in an employment tribunal is filed in an employment tribunal located at the defendant’s place of settlement or at the workplace where the employee was located on the date of the lawsuit, or in a civil court of first instance tasked with handling employment cases.
The authority rule in the article regulating the authority of the labor court above relates to public order and is final. According to the above-mentioned provision, the plaintiff employee may file the case in the court of the place where the work is performed or in the court of the defendant’s residence.
In a concrete dispute, the place where the plaintiff does his work is “…/…”, this address falls within the scope of the Istanbul Labor Courts, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit in the court of the place where he does his authorized work using the right of choice, therefore, the dispute is Istanbul 4. It was stated that it should be heard and decided in the Employment Tribunal.
Conclusion: For the reasons explained above, Article 21 of the CCP numbered 6100. and 22. according to the articles of the competent court Istanbul 4. It was decided unanimously to designate it as an Employment Tribunal on 22.06.2016.