12 Dec The Witness Is In a Direct Alliance With The Plaintiff
T.C.
SUPREME
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
E. 2015/20572
K. 2018/1190
T. 24.1.2018
Labor receivables (plaintiff and Witness are witnesses to each other and the calculations are made based on witness statements/they are people who work together in the same workplace and claim for the same reason and are directly in the Union of interests cannot be respected in the testimony statements – since no other evidence has been presented, the plaintiff’s unprovable overtime national holiday and general holiday fee Food fee difference receivables and severance pay related to these receivables )
Employees in the same workplace testify against each other ( for the same reason, they are claimants and are directly in the Union of interests, the statements of testimony cannot be respected – no other evidence has been presented, so the plaintiff will receive a difference in overtime national holiday and general holiday fee Food fee, which cannot be proven, as well as severance pay associated with these receivables will be rejected )
Because the witness is directly in a union of interests with the plaintiff ( people who work together in the same workplace and claim for the same reason and are directly in a Union of interests, the statements of testimony cannot be respected – since no other evidence has been presented, the plaintiff will receive a difference in overtime national holiday and general holiday fee Food fee, which cannot be proven, as well as the denial of severance pay associated with these receivables )
6100 / m.255
Summary: The plaintiff claimed that he worked as a driver and that a warning was sent to the defendant due to non-payment of the plaintiff’s labor receivables and asked the defendant to collect severance pay, overtime pay, Week holiday pay, national holiday and general holiday pay, annual paid leave, balance meal fee. The plaintiff has proved by witness his claim of non-payment of overtime, national holiday and general holiday wages, which he has stated on the basis of justified termination. In case files filed on appeal on the same day, it was understood that the plaintiffs had witnessed each other and that the calculations were based on witness statements. Plaintiffs work together in the same workplace and for the same reason
they are claimants and are directly in the Union of interests. For this reason, statements of testimony cannot be discredited. It was not presented in any other evidence. For this reason, the plaintiff must be denied overtime, national holiday and general holiday fees, food fee difference receivables and severance payments related to these receivables that cannot be proved.
Case: the plaintiff requested that severance pay and overtime pay, Week holiday pay, annual leave Pay, balance meal pay, national holiday and general holiday pay be paid. The Local Court has decided to partially accept the case. Although it was appealed by the defendant’s lawyer at trial during the term of the sentence; HUMK.nun 438.after it was decided that the request for a hearing was rejected from the amount and that the examination should be carried out on the document, the report organized by the examination Judge was submitted, the file was examined, the need was spoken and considered:
Decision: a -) summary of Plaintiff request:
The plaintiff claimed that he worked as a driver, and that a warning was sent to the defendant due to non-payment of the plaintiff’s labor receivables, and asked the defendant to collect severance pay, overtime pay, Week holiday pay, national holiday and general holiday pay, annual paid leave, balance meal fees.
B -) Summary Of Respondent’s Response:
The defendant asked for the dismissal of the case, arguing that the plaintiff’s employment contract was terminated due to absenteeism.
C -) summary of Local Court decision and trial process:
Based on the collected evidence and expert report, the court decided to partially accept the case.
D -) Appeal:
The defendant’s attorney appealed the decision.
E -) Justification:
The plaintiff claimed that the employee had rightly terminated the employment contract because the receivables were not paid, and sought overtime,national holiday and general holiday pay, Week break, food difference and, accordingly, severance pay.
The defendant employer argued for absenteeism.
It was denied by the court that the plaintiff would receive overtime, national holiday and general holiday, as well as a request for a week’s vacation under the provision that they would receive severance pay, as well as annual paid leave. The plaintiff has proved by witness his claim of non-payment of overtime, national holiday and general holiday wages, which he has stated on the basis of justified termination. In case files filed on appeal on the same day, the plaintiffs witnessed each other(2015/4898 E., 2015/34583 E., 36420 E.,) and it was understood that calculations were made based on witness statements.
Plaintiffs are people who work together in the same workplace and claim for the same reason, and they are directly in the Union of interests. For this reason, statements of testimony cannot be discredited. It was not presented in any other evidence. For this reason, the plaintiff’s undeniable overtime, national holiday and general holiday fee, food fee difference receivables and severance pay related to these receivables should be denied, while the written decision was wrong and required to be overturned.
Conclusion: it was unanimously decided on 24.01.2018 to overturn the Appeal decision due to the above written reason and to return the appeal fee received in advance to the concerned person if requested.
No Comments