T.C. SUPREME COURT<\/p>\n
20.law office
\nBase: 2016\/5753
\nDecision: 2016\/7425
\nDate of Decision: 22.06.2016<\/p>\n
CASE OF LABOR RECEIVABLES \u2013 THE PLAINTIFF STAYS IN THE JURISDICTION OF THE LABOR COURTS AT THE ADDRESS WHERE HE DOES HIS JOB \u2013 THE PLAINTIFF FILES A LAWSUIT IN THE COURT OF THE PLACE WHERE HE DOES HIS JOB, WHICH IS AUTHORIZED USING HIS RIGHT TO CHOOSE<\/p>\n
ABSTRACT: In a concrete dispute, the address of the plaintiff’s place of work is \u201c…\/…”, this address is also ……….. The Employment Courts remain in the jurisdiction, the plaintiff files a lawsuit in the local court where he does his authorized work using his right of choice, therefore the dispute ……….. It must be considered and concluded in the Employment Tribunal.<\/p>\n
(5521 Pp. K. m. 5)<\/p>\n
Case and Decision4. Istanbul in the case of labor receivables between the parties. I\u015f and Bak\u0131rk\u00f6y 6. All documents in the file sent to determine the place of jurisdiction due to the fact that an unauthorized decision was made by the Labor Courts separately were examined and considered necessary.<\/p>\n
The lawsuit relates to the claim that they will receive severance pay, annual leave, overtime and general vacation pay.<\/p>\n
Istanbul 4. 5 of the Labor Courts Law No. 5521, the labor court. in accordance with the article, he made a decision on non-jurisdiction on the grounds that the case should be opened in the court of the defendant’s residence or place of work, that the authority in the employment trial should be from the public order and that it should be taken into account if you are re.<\/p>\n
6th Century B.C. As for the Employment Court, the authority in the employment trial is from the public order and must be taken into account if necessary, Law No. 5521 5. according to the article, the case should be filed in the court of the defendant’s residence or place of work, in a concrete dispute, the place of work is in the Istanbul jurisdiction, the company’s headquarters is in the … jurisdiction, although the case was filed in the court of the place of work, the file was sent, the address of the plaintiff’s place of work is \u201c… \/…\u201d, this address remains in the jurisdiction of the … Court made an unauthorized decision on the grounds that the file was sent.<\/p>\n
5 of the Labor Courts Law No. 5521. in its article, labor courts have been designated as competent in labor disputes in terms of location. Accordingly, “Any case that will be filed in employment tribunals can be considered in the place of residence of the plaintiff in accordance with the Turkish Civil Code at the time of its opening, as well as in the competent court for the workplace where the employee does his job. Contrary to these, the contract is not considered valid.” the provision is contained in the.<\/p>\n
The october of jurisdiction in Employment Courts is in accordance with the rules of jurisdiction of the Code of Civil Procedure, and in addition, the place where the work is done, in other words, the place where the workplace is located, also authorizes the courts.<\/p>\n
The case filed with the labor court must be filed in the labor court or the civil court of first instance, which is charged with considering labor cases at the place where the defendant’s residence is located or where the employee does his job on the date of the case.<\/p>\n
The authority rule contained in the said article regulating the authority of the employment court is related to public order and is of a definite nature. According to the provision in question, the plaintiff employee can open the case in the court of the place of work, as well as in the court of the defendant’s residence.<\/p>\n
In the dispute, the address of the plaintiff’s place of work is \u201c… \/…\u201d, this address also remains in the jurisdiction of the Istanbul Labor Courts, the plaintiff files a lawsuit in the court of the place where he does his job, which is authorized using his right to choose, so the dispute is Istanbul 4. It must be considered and concluded in the Employment Tribunal.<\/p>\n
Conclusion: For the reasons described above, HMK No. 6100 has 21 and 22. according to the articles of Istanbul 4. It was unanimously decided to designate the Labor Court as the place of jurisdiction from 22.06.2016.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T.C. SUPREME COURT 20.law office Base: 2016\/5753 Decision: 2016\/7425 Date of Decision: 22.06.2016 CASE OF LABOR RECEIVABLES \u2013 THE PLAINTIFF STAYS IN THE JURISDICTION OF THE LABOR COURTS AT THE ADDRESS WHERE HE DOES HIS JOB \u2013 THE PLAINTIFF FILES A LAWSUIT IN THE COURT…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1095],"tags":[217,223,220,218],"yoast_head":"\n