Imposition Of The Highest Interest Applied To Deposits By Banks On Overtime Work And General Holiday Claims From The Default Date
T.C. JUDICIARY
22nd Civil Chamber
Basis: 2014/19136
Decision: 2014/23067
Date of Decision: 08.09.2014
Imposition Of The Highest Interest Applied To Deposits By Banks On Overtime Work And General Holiday Claims From The Default Date
SUMMARY: In the concrete case, the plaintiff demanded the payment of overtime and general holiday receivables with the notice drawn to the employer before the date of the lawsuit and made the employer default in terms of the said receivables. Since the lawsuit and the amendment petition request interest from the date of default for the said receivables, the highest interest applied by banks to deposits should be applied to the overtime and general holiday receivables from the date of default. The awarding of interest from the date of the lawsuit and amendment is erroneous and requires reversal.
(4857 S. K. art. 34) (6100 S. K. art. 297)
Case: The plaintiff-cross-defendant requested a decision on the payment of severance pay, overtime work and national holiday and general holiday pay receivables, and the defendant-cross-defendant requested a decision on the collection of notice pay and material cost receivables.
The court partially ruled the request.
Since the judgment was appealed by the plaintiff-counter-defendant lawyer within the time limit, the file was examined and the necessary discussions were held after listening to the report prepared by the Examining Judge F. Yücesoy for the case file:
Court of Cassation Decision
Summary of the Claimant’s Request:
The plaintiff-counter-defendant claimed that he terminated the employment contract for just cause and demanded severance pay and overtime and general holiday receivables.
Summary of Defendant’s Response:
The defendant-counter-defendant argued that the plaintiff’s employment contract was terminated based on the just cause of absenteeism and that the employee who left the job without cause should pay notice pay, and requested that the lawsuit be dismissed and the plaintiff be sentenced to pay notice pay and the cost of undelivered materials.
Summary of the Court Decision:
The court, based on the evidence collected and the expert report, decided to partially accept the main and counterclaims.
Appeal:
The decision was appealed by the counsel for the plaintiff-counterclaimant.
Grounds:
1. According to the writings in the file, the evidence gathered and the legal grounds on which the decision is based, it is necessary to reject all the appellate objections of the plaintiff-counter-defendant other than those covered by the following subparagraphs.
2. Article 297/2 of the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 stipulates that “(2) In the conclusion part of the judgment, without repeating any words belonging to the reasoning, the judgment given on each of the claims, the obligations imposed on the parties and the rights granted, under the sequence number; It is necessary to show clearly, in a way that does not arouse doubt and hesitation.”
It is understood that the court did not make a positive or negative decision on the plaintiff’s severance pay claim. The failure to make a positive or negative judgment on some of the plaintiff’s claims was erroneous and required a reversal.
3. The plaintiff employee requested overtime and general holiday pay, and the court decided to accept the request.
Overtime and general holiday wages are in the nature of wages in a broad sense, and according to Article 34 of the Labor Law No. 4857, if they are not paid on time, the highest interest applied to deposits by banks should be decided.
In case the employer is in default before the date of the lawsuit, interest should be charged from the date of default depending on the request. Otherwise, interest should be decided limited to the amounts requested as of the dates of the lawsuit and amendment/additional lawsuit.
In the concrete case, the plaintiff requested the payment of overtime work and general holiday receivables with the notice he drew to the employer before the date of the lawsuit and made the employer default in terms of the aforementioned receivables. Since the lawsuit and the amendment petition request interest from the default date for the aforementioned receivables, the highest interest applied by banks to deposits should be applied to the overtime and general holiday receivables from the default date. The award of interest from the date of lawsuit and amendment is erroneous and requires reversal.
Conclusion It was unanimously decided on 08.09.2014 to overturn the appealed decision for the reasons written above and to refund the prepaid appeal fee to the related party upon request.