Statute Of Limitations In Labor Cases
Statute of Limitations
First of all, it should be mentioned that prescription is not an objection but a “defense”. Def’i and objection are different concepts. A defence (in the sense of procedural law) is a right that allows the defendant to refrain from performing an act that it actually owes for any special reason. To explain, the defendant is a debtor, but the defendant has the right to refrain from fulfilling that obligation for a special reason.
The difference between defenses and objections is that in an objection, the right has either never arisen or has ceased to exist.
However, in a defence, the right exists, but as mentioned above, the defendant may refrain from fulfilling that right for a special reason. If the defendant has not explicitly asserted the defense, even if the judge learns the existence of the defense from the facts stated by one of the parties, he/she cannot automatically consider it. In the case of an objection, the judge will ex officio take into consideration the objections that he/she understands from the facts asserted, even if they are not explicitly raised by the parties.
For this reason, if the defendant has not duly raised a statute of limitations defense, the expert cannot automatically consider the statute of limitations. Therefore, he will have to make a calculation for the entire working period.
However, it is stated in the decisions of the Court of Cassation, the courts of first instance and other decisions of the law that if the reply petition is filed in due time, a statute of limitations defense may be filed against the lawsuit by way of amendment of the reply petition.
In addition, other joint debtors may also benefit from the statute of limitations defense asserted by one of the debtors who are joint debtors in any lawsuit.
On the other hand, the Code of Obligations contains the rule “When the statute of limitations is interrupted against one of the joint debtors or debtors of an indivisible debt, it is also interrupted against the others.” According to the said article, the interruption of the statute of limitations against one of the joint debtors shall also interrupt the statute of limitations against the other joint debtors.
According to Article 128 of the Code of Obligations, the statute of limitations starts to run on the date when the receivable is due, that is, when it is demandable. In other words, if the time for the performance of the obligation agreed between the parties has arrived, the receivable becomes due and payable.
According to Article 152 of the Code of Obligations, when the principal receivable becomes time-barred, interest and other additional rights also become time-barred. To explain, the interest receivable shall be subject to the statute of limitations applicable to the principal receivable.
On the other hand, there are cases where the statute of limitations is interrupted. For example, the statute of limitations is interrupted when the creditor files a lawsuit. However, the statute of limitations is interrupted only for the receivable and the amount specified for the receivable.
Therefore, for example, if the rights regarding the surplus are reserved while filing a partial lawsuit, the statute of limitations is interrupted for the partially claimed amount. In the event that the plaintiff amends the lawsuit after filing a partial lawsuit, the defendant may raise a statute of limitations defense against the amendment. Even if the defense of statute of limitations is asserted, it will be necessary to determine the amount of statute of limitations between the dates of the lawsuit and the amendment, and to calculate whether the amount claimed in the lawsuit meets the statute of limitations.
However, the situation will change in case of filing an indefinite receivable lawsuit. The indefinite receivable lawsuit filed within the scope of Article 107 of the CCP interrupts the statute of limitations for the entire receivable as of the date of the lawsuit. In the event that an indefinite receivable lawsuit is filed, the amounts demanded by the lawsuit after the expert calculation are not amended, the value of the lawsuit is increased. In this case, the fee to be paid should be paid as a completion fee, not an amendment fee. Since there is no amendment, it will not be possible to assert a statute of limitations defense against the amendment.