The Behaviour Of The Employee Who Says He Is Going To Friday Prayer And Goes To A Coffee House Is A Reason For Justified Termination
9th Civil Chamber 2014/8250 E. , 2014/22224 K.
“Case Law Text”
COURT : BAKIRKÖY 11TH LABOUR COURT
DATE : 04/02/2014
NUMBER : 2013/111-2014/64
THE CASE :
Plaintiff requested a decision on the invalidity of the termination and reinstatement.
The local court ruled the request.
Since the judgement was appealed by the defendant’s lawyer within the time limit, the file was examined and the necessity was discussed and considered after the report prepared by the Examining Judge for the case file was listened:
JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT
A) Summary of the Claimant’s Request:
The plaintiff claimed that his employment contract was terminated without a justified or valid reason and requested a decision on the invalidity of the termination and reinstatement.
B) Summary of the Defendant’s Response:
The defendant claims that the plaintiff’s employment contract was terminated for just cause, that the plaintiff had previously caused damage to the employer due to careless and sloppy work, but the employer only gave a warning, that on the date of termination, the plaintiff stated that he was going to Friday prayer and left the workplace with the shuttle service allocated to the workers for this purpose, but that he did not go to Friday prayer and spent this time in the coffee shop and returned to the workplace with the workers returning from prayer,
The plaintiff argued that this situation was recorded by witnesses, that the workplace continued to operate during these hours, that the plaintiff’s leaving work by stating that he was going to Friday prayers but spending time in a coffee shop instead of going to Friday prayers was a behaviour incompatible with honesty and loyalty, that the employer’s trust was abused, that his defence was requested and his defence was taken, that the plaintiff’s employment contract was rightfully terminated and requested the dismissal of the lawsuit.
C) Summary of the Local Court Decision:
The court decided to accept the lawsuit on the grounds that it is not possible to mention that the behaviour that caused the termination fundamentally collapsed the working relationship with the plaintiff employee in the eyes of the employer, that it is not sincere to make the behaviour that should have resulted in the warning of the employee at most as a just cause of termination, and that it is not possible to talk about a legally valid termination.
D) Appeal
The defendant appealed the judgement.
E) Rationale:
In the concrete dispute, it is fixed that the plaintiff employee left the workplace and went to the coffee house by stating that he was going to Friday prayer with the shuttle service allocated by the employer for the employees who want to go to Friday prayer, and it is erroneous to decide to accept the lawsuit on erroneous grounds without considering that these actions of the plaintiff caused negativities in the workplace, the trust relationship between the parties was shaken, in this case, the continuation of the employment relationship cannot be expected from the employer and the employer’s termination was valid for this reason.
Pursuant to Article 20/3 of the Labour Law No. 4857, our Chamber has decided as follows.
JUDGEMENT :
For the reason explained above;
1. The decision of the court is annulled and annulled,
2. Dismissal of the case,
3. Since the fee was collected in advance, it is not necessary to collect it again,
4. The judicial expenses incurred by the plaintiff shall be left on the plaintiff, and the defendant’s (226.80) TL judicial expenses shall be collected from the plaintiff and paid to the defendant,
5. To charge the plaintiff an attorney fee of 1.500 TL according to the tariff in force on the date of the decision and to give it to the defendant,
6. The prepaid appeal fee shall be returned to the defendant upon request,
It was unanimously decided on 30.06.2014.
You can access our other article examples and petition examples by clicking here.