The Witness Has A Direct Interests With The Plaintiff
T.C.
JUDICIARY
- LAW DIVISION
- E. 2015/20572
- K. 2018/1190
- T. 24.1.2018
LABOR WAGES (It is understood that the Plaintiff and the Witness are Witnesses to each other and the calculations were made based on the Witness Statements/People who worked together at the same workplace and claim rights for the same reason, and they are directly in the Union of Interests The Witness Statements cannot be relied upon since they are in the process of testifying – Since no other evidence has been presented, the Claimant’s Unprovable Overtime, National Holiday and General Holiday Wage, Meal Wage Difference Receivables and Severance Pay Related to These Receivables Should be Rejected )
WHEN EMPLOYEES WORKING IN THE SAME WORKPLACE WITNESS TO EACH OTHER (Since They Are Persons Claiming Rights For The Same Reason And They Are Directly In The Union Of Interests, Their Witness Statements Cannot Be Relied On – No Other Evidence Has Been Presented, Therefore, The Claimant’s Unprovable Overtime, National Holiday and General Holiday Wage, Meal Wage Difference Claims And Severance Pay Related To These Claims Will Be Rejected)
THE WITNESS IS IN DIRECT INTEREST UNION WITH THE CLAIMANT ( The Witness Statements cannot be relied upon since they are the persons who work together at the same workplace and claim rights for the same reason and they are in direct interest unity – Since no other evidence is presented, the Claimant’s Unprovable Overtime, National Holiday and General Holiday Wage, Meal Wage Difference Claims and Severance Pay Related to These Claims Should be Rejected )
6100/m.255
SUMMARY : The plaintiff claimed that he worked as a driver and that a notice was sent to the defendant due to the non-payment of the plaintiff’s labor receivables and demanded the collection of severance pay, overtime wages, week holiday wages, national holidays and general holiday wages, annual paid leave, balance meal wages from the defendant. The plaintiff proved the claim of non-payment of overtime, national holiday and general holiday wage receivables based on just termination with witnesses. It is understood that the plaintiffs were witnesses to each other in the case files examined on appeal on the same day and the calculations were made on the basis of witness statements. The plaintiffs worked together at the same workplace and for the same reason
are claimants of rights and are in a direct community of interest. For this reason, their testimonies cannot be relied upon. No other evidence has been submitted. For this reason, the plaintiff’s unproven overtime, national holiday and general holiday wages, meal wage difference receivables and severance pay related to these receivables should be rejected.
LAWSUIT : The plaintiff requested a decision on severance pay and payment of overtime wages, week holiday wages, annual leave wages, balance meal wages, national holiday and general holiday wages. The local court decided to partially accept the lawsuit. Although the judgment was appealed by the defendant’s lawyer with a hearing within the time limit, the request for a hearing was rejected in accordance with Article 438 of the Code of Civil Procedure and after it was decided to conduct the examination on the documents, the report prepared by the Examining Judge was presented, the file was examined, the file was examined, and the necessity was discussed and considered:
DECISION : A-) Summary of the Claimant’s Request:
The plaintiff claimed that he worked as a driver, that a notice was sent to the defendant due to the non-payment of the plaintiff’s labor receivables, and requested the collection of severance pay, overtime wages, week holiday wages, national holiday and general holiday wages, annual paid leave, and balance meal wages from the defendant.
B-) Summary of the Defendant’s Response:
The defendant defended that the plaintiff’s employment contract was terminated due to absenteeism and requested the dismissal of the lawsuit.
C-) Summary of the Local Court Decision and Trial Process:
The court, based on the evidence collected and the expert report, decided to partially accept the lawsuit.
D-) Appeal:
The decision was appealed by the defendant’s counsel.
E-) Grounds:
The plaintiff employee claimed that he terminated his employment contract rightfully because his receivables were not paid and demanded overtime, national holiday and general holiday pay, week holiday, meal allowance and severance pay accordingly.
The defendant employer made a defense of absenteeism.
The court ruled for the plaintiff’s overtime, national holiday and general holiday and severance pay receivables based on these, and rejected the claim for week holidays and annual paid leave. The plaintiff proved his claim of non-payment of overtime, national holiday and general holiday wage receivables based on just termination with witnesses. It is understood that the plaintiffs were witnesses to each other in the case files (2015/4898 E., 2015/34583 E., 36420 E.,) and the calculations were made based on the witness statements.
The plaintiffs are persons who work together in the same workplace and claim rights for the same reason, and they are in direct unity of interest. For this reason, the witness statements cannot be relied upon. No other evidence has been submitted. For this reason, while the plaintiff’s unproven overtime, national holiday and general holiday wages, meal wage difference receivables and severance pay related to these receivables should be rejected, it was erroneous to make a decision in writing and required a reversal.
CONCLUSION : It was unanimously decided on 24.01.2018 that the appealed decision shall be reversed for the reasons written above, and the prepaid appeal fee shall be returned to the relevant party if requested.