T.R. SUPREME COURT
- Law Office
Basis: 2016/15857
Decision: 2016/18919
Decision Date: 23.06.2016
CASE OF WORKERS’ CLAIMS – COURT DECISION BASED ON THE EXPERT’S REPORT WHICH IS WRONG TO NOT CONSIDER FOOD AND HOUSING AID IN THE CALCULATION OF THE FEES clad in the REPORT REPORT
SUMMARY: In the concrete case, the fact that food and accommodation aid is not taken into account in the calculation of the wages dressed in the expert report, which is the basis for the decision of the court, is incorrect. The clad fee should be determined by considering the acceptance that .. TL food and accommodation aid is provided. Making a decision with a erroneous evaluation was not accurate and required breaking it.
(4857 S. K. Art. 17, 41)
Lawsuit: The plaintiff has requested the payment of severance pay, notice indemnity and annual leave receivables.
The court partially granted the request.
Although the parties’ lawyers appealed and a hearing was requested by the defendant’s lawyer during the sentence; After it was decided to reject the request for the hearing and to carry out the examination on the documents, since there was no postage stamp to be affixed to the invitation to notify the parties of the hearing date, the report prepared by the Investigation Judge was presented, the file was examined, the need was discussed:
The plaintiff’s attorney stated that his client worked at the defendant’s construction sites abroad between 2005 and 2008, his employment contract was unfairly terminated by the employer, his net wage was 9,00 Saudi Riyals, and social benefits such as three meals a day, shelter and heating were provided from the defendant, and the severance and notice indemnity was collected from the defendant. requested.
The defendant’s attorney demanded the dismissal of the case, stating that the claims of the plaintiff were time-barred, that his client was not the real employer of the plaintiff, that the plaintiff was paid or that his work was terminated due to the liquidation, and that the claims were unfair and unfounded.
Based on the evidence gathered at the end of the trial and the expert report, the court decided to partially accept the case with a written justification.
The decision was appealed by the parties.
1-According to the articles in the file, the collected evidence and the legally compelling reasons on which the decision is based, the defendant’s appeals whose reasons are not specified and the plaintiff’s appeals that fall outside the scope of the paragraph below are not valid.
2- In the determination of the clothed wage, which will be the basis for severance and notice pay, in addition to the main wage mentioned in Article 32 of the Labor Law No. 4857, money or benefits that can be measured in money are taken into account. Accordingly, bonus, permanent premium, fuel allowance, clothing allowance, rent, lighting, service allowance, food aid and similar payments are taken into account in the calculation of severance pay.
In the concrete case, the fact that food and accommodation aid is not taken into account in the calculation of the wages dressed in the expert report, which is the basis of the court’s decision, is incorrect. The clothed wage should be determined by considering the acceptance of food and shelter assistance. Making a written decision with a erroneous evaluation was not accurate and required reversal.
Conclusion: It was unanimously decided on 23.06.2016 that the appealed decision be reversed for the reasons stated above, and that the appeal fee paid in advance be returned to the relevant party upon request.
