9.Law office
Base Number: 2021/1317
Decision Number: 2021/5702
“Justice Text”
REGIONAL COURT
COURT: … 7th Civil Chamber
TYPE OF CASE: CREDIT
FIRST DEGREE
COURT: … 43. Labor Court
The decision made as a result of the lawsuit between the parties was requested by the plaintiff’s attorney to be examined on appeal, and it was understood that the appeal request was in time. After listening to the report prepared by the Investigation Judge for the case file, the file was examined, the need was discussed and considered:
Y A R G I T A Y A R A R I
Summary of Plaintiff’s Claim:
The plaintiff’s attorney stated that his client started to work at the defendant bank on 27.03.1989, worked for a long time in different units of the bank as assistant system operator, computer operator, assistant chief, service officer, assistant director, that the defendant bank applied the exam system for promotion, and his client took the exam in 2011. , he applied to be promoted to director, but when he investigated the matter when his name was not on the list, he learned that he was not accepted to the exam due to the opinion of “not available” for the senior title qualification of the chief of the registry in 2010, thereupon … 14. Labor Court filed a lawsuit with the file numbered 2011/443 and demanded annulment. First of all, the request for annulment was rejected by the court because the employee could not file an annulment action for the employee’s registration grade, and the 9th Law Department of the Supreme Court of Appeals decided to enter into the merits of the work, stating that it would lead to a change in the employee’s personal rights such as the registration grade, seniority, title and promotion. After determining that a decision on non-compliance should be rendered, the local court re-registered to the 2014/2036 principle after the decision of the local court was overturned. 26.09.2016 day, 2016/1967 decision, decision numbered 2016/16632, it was approved and finalized, that the practice done to the client damaged the plaintiff’s professional … and reputation, he suffered victimization, his mental and physical balances were upset, his psychology deteriorated and there was a serious attack on his personal rights. Claiming that he was morally and materially worn out due to the transaction, without prejudice to his right to the surplus, 101,000,00 TL compensation for non-pecuniary damage and 1,000,00 TL for pecuniary damage, together with the legal interests to be accrued from the date of the event. It has demanded and sued that it be decided to charge the defendant with the collection of the trial expenses and attorney’s fees.
Summary of Respondent’s Response:
Attorney for the defendant; arguing that the claimant’s claims are unfounded and that he has not suffered any financial loss and moral damage, he demanded that the case be dismissed.
Summary of First Instance Court Decision:
Although the negative record given to the plaintiff was later canceled by the court, the claim for non-pecuniary damages was partially accepted on the grounds that the plaintiff was in a difficult situation against his work and social environment, his professional and reputation was damaged, he suffered grievances, and he was morally damaged. decision was rejected.
Summary of the District Court’s Decision:
The Regional Court of Justice decided to reject the appeal of the plaintiff’s attorney on the grounds that “the defendant did not act objectively to the plaintiff or there was no evidence that the claimant was deliberately not qualified for the upper title”, and the defendant’s attorney’s appeal was accepted on the merits.
Appeal Application:
The attorneys of the opposing parties filed separate appeals against the decision of the Court of First Instance.
Appeal Application:
The plaintiff’s attorney appealed the decision within the statutory period.
Reason:
1-According to the evidence gathered from the articles in the file and the legally compelling reasons on which the decision is based, the plaintiff’s appeals that fall outside the scope of the paragraph below are not appropriate.
2- In the concrete dispute, the plaintiff requested material and moral compensation on the grounds that he was prevented from taking the promotion exam due to his negative track record. In the lawsuit filed by the plaintiff for the annulment of the negative registration grade, the court of first instance stated that “during the time the plaintiff worked at the defendant bank, the average of the 9-year average of the registration evaluation grades of the last ten years was 95.6, and the registry score completed at the end of 2010 was 85, and since 2001 there has been a While there is the phrase “he has the ability to serve in a higher position”, it is stated that one of the performance supervisors’ giving an opinion that “he does not exist” prevents him from taking the promotion exam, that the records should be arranged according to objective principles, that the score of the 2010 registry score of 85 does not comply with the objective principles and the reason is not stated, and the claimant’s request is appropriate. The decision regarding the annulment of the registration note was approved by the decision of our Department dated 26/09/2016 and numbered 2016/21967 and no 2016/16632. plaintiff
After the end of the proceedings regarding the annulment of the registration note, he claimed pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages with the case at hand. In order for non-pecuniary compensation to be awarded, there must be a severe convulsion and imbalance in the moral entity, such as insulting honor and dignity, and an attack on personal rights as a result of actions and actions that are contrary to the legislation. Despite the fact that the negative record given to the plaintiff was later revoked, considering the factors such as the plaintiff’s position in the bank, previous registration grades, working time at the bank, the plaintiff was in a difficult situation against his work and social environment, his professional … and reputation was damaged, victimization It is wrong to decide that the claimant’s non-pecuniary damage claim should be accepted at a reasonable rate, since it is understood that he has lived and suffered moral damage.
CONCLUSION: The appealed decision of the First Instance Court and the decision of the Regional Court of Justice, which accepted the appeal against this decision on its merits, were OVERRIDED and ELIMINATED, the file was sent to the Regional Court of Justice that made the decision, a copy of the reversal decision was sent to the Court of First Instance, the appeal was received in advance. It was unanimously decided on 08/03/2021 that the decision fee be returned to the relevant person upon request.
