The use of a diploma known to be fake by 23 employees is a legitimate business outcome.
Published at 12:56 by Court Decisions by Yağız Canseven 0 Comments
0 Likes
Share
Law Office
Case Number: 2010/22804 E
Decision Number: 2012/32150
“Text of Justice”
COURT: CIVIL (LABOR) COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CASE: The plaintiff requested a decision ordering the payment of seniority and notice compensation.
The local court accepted the request.
Although the defendant’s lawyer filed an appeal during the trial, after hearing the report prepared by the investigating judge for the case file, the file was reviewed and the need was discussed and evaluated:
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION
A) Summary of the Plaintiff’s Request:
In the complaint, the plaintiff’s attorney claimed that the plaintiff worked at the defendant’s workplace between April 11, 2000, and June 19, 2009, and that although the employment contract was terminated unjustly, the plaintiff’s receivables were not paid. The plaintiff requested a decision ordering the defendant to pay severance and notice pay and filed a lawsuit.
B) Summary of the Defendant’s Response:
In the response, the defendant’s attorney stated that the plaintiff presented his Keşan Industrial Vocational High School diploma along with other job application documents during the hiring process, but that an investigation conducted upon receiving the notification determined that the diploma did not belong to the plaintiff. Therefore, the defendant requested that the lawsuit be dismissed, stating that the plaintiff’s employment contract was terminated for just cause in accordance with Article 25/II-a.
C) Summary of the Local Court Decision:
According to witness testimony, unskilled workers were employed during the period when the plaintiff started work. It was decided to accept the case on the grounds that whether or not the plaintiff was a graduate of an industrial vocational high school was not one of the essential elements of the employment contract, that the situation was understood 9 years after the examination of the work document, that the conditions for just termination did not exist, and that it constituted a valid reason for the employer.
D) Appeal:
The defendant appealed the decision.
E) Grounds:
1- Whether the termination of the plaintiff’s employment contract was justified is debatable.
Although the court accepted that the termination of the employment contract was unjustified, this acceptance is not consistent with the case file. As understood from the plaintiff’s defense, the plaintiff knowingly used a false document by giving a diploma he knew to be false to someone else who did not belong to him. Due to this subsequently discovered situation, the termination of the plaintiff’s employment contract is based on just cause. The acceptance of the plaintiff’s claims for seniority and notice compensation instead of their rejection is erroneous.
F) Conclusion:
For the reasons stated above, it was unanimously decided on October 1, 2012, to impose an EXCESSIVE FINANCIAL PENALTY on the contested decision and to refund the advance appeal fee upon the request of the interested party.