Categories: GeneralINFORMATION

THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF CASSATION ON THE LIMITATION PERIOD AND EXCEPTION IN THE CASE OF SERVICE DETERMINATION

We mentioned in our previous articles that the service detection case is a case filed when, despite working in a job that is considered insured, the employee has not been notified to the Social Security Institution or has been reported missing, the employer has been notified of entry to the job, but no premium payment has been made.

Firstly, the employer is obliged to inform the institution within 1 month that the employee has started working. Even if the employee does not inform the institution that he has started his job, this does not constitute evidence against the employee on behalf of the employee.

PERSONS WHO CAN BE CONSIDERED INSURED

2 of Law No. 506. According to Article 4 of the Law No. 5510. according to the article:

1- Those employed by the employer with the service agreement,

2- Artists, writers and thinkers employed by the employer,

3- 657 sk m. temporary personnel called 4/c personnel employed under subparagraph 4/c,

4- Village guards,

5- Those who are assigned by public administrations for tuition fees,

6- In the courses organized by the Ministry of national education, ”master” instructors are employed,

7- General housewives,

8- Foreign citizens, employees with a service agreement are considered insured.

THE PERIOD OF REDUCTION OF RIGHTS IN THE CASE OF SERVICE DETERMINATION

The limitation period for service determination cases is 5 years. The court may officially take into account whether the right reduction period has passed or not, even if the parties do not put forward it. This 5-year period begins from the end of the year when the services of the worker pass. If the employee works in workplaces belonging to different employers, the period of entitlement reduction begins from the date of departure at each workplace. However, in some cases, there is no right reduction period. The following Supreme Court Decision was made for these cases:

“…The plaintiff requested that the defendant be determined to be working with the employer and that the collection of labor receivables be decided. 79/1 of the Law on which documents the employer must provide to the Institution for the insured. as is clearly stated in the article, it is left to the regulation. In the cited Social Insurance Transactions Regulation, the documents to be provided to the Institution by the employer are; declaration of entry into employment, declaration of monthly insurance premiums, period payroll, etc. it is listed as follows. Even if one of these documents has been provided to the Institution or the Institution has determined the fact of actually or kayden insured work, the right reduction period cannot be mentioned …” (Supreme Court 21. HD. E. 2008/9842, 2009/7830 K.)

It is seen that if one of the documents such as the employment entry certificate, insurance premium declaration, period payroll has been provided to the institution by the employer, the right reduction period will not work. If you have completed the pension requirements with the addition of your minus service, you must apply to the Social Security Institution for a pension application, and if your request is rejected, you must file a service determination lawsuit in the employment courts.

Yağız Canseven

Recent Posts

A CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION UNDER THE WORKPLACE INSURANCE POLICY, WHICH ALSO INCLUDES EARTHQUAKE COVERAGE

17. Law Office 2018/1547 E. , 2018/12611 K. “text of jurisprudence” COURT : Court of…

2 years ago

REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION OF EVIDENCE AND DECISION

ARTICLE 402 OF THE CCP (1) The request for the determination of evidence shall be…

2 years ago

DETERMINATION OF EVIDENCE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF HMK

ARTICLE 400 OF THE Civil Procedure Code (1) Each of the Parties may request that…

2 years ago

CHILDREN RECEIVE COMPENSATION FOR DEPRIVATION OF SUPPORT DUE TO PARENTS

SUPPORT OF PARENTS TO THEIR CHILDREN 1- GENERAL RULE According to the decisions of the…

2 years ago

COUNCIL OF STATE DECISION ON EARTHQUAKE INSURANCE

11. Apartment 2001/2549 E. , 2005/183 K . “text of jurisprudence” T.C. COUNCIL OF STATE…

2 years ago

COMPENSATION LAWSUIT FOR DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE EARTHQUAKE

17. Law Office 2016/11461 E. , 2019/7615 K. “text of jurisprudence” COURT : Court of…

2 years ago