{"id":1091,"date":"2020-06-15T18:10:26","date_gmt":"2020-06-15T15:10:26","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/hukuk.name\/?p=1091"},"modified":"2023-06-01T13:27:44","modified_gmt":"2023-06-01T13:27:44","slug":"ikale-sozlesmesine-ragmen-kidem-tazminati-ve-ihbar-tazminatina-hukmedilmesi","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/2020\/06\/15\/ikale-sozlesmesine-ragmen-kidem-tazminati-ve-ihbar-tazminatina-hukmedilmesi\/","title":{"rendered":"\u0130kale s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine ra\u011fmen k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131 ve ihbar tazminat\u0131na h\u00fckmedilmesi"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>9. Hukuk Dairesi &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2018\/1949 E. &nbsp;, &nbsp;2020\/2950 K.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>&#8220;\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni&#8221;<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><br><br>MAHKEMES\u0130 : &#8230; B\u00d6LGE ADL\u0130YE MAHKEMES\u0130 9. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130<br><br><br>DAVA : Davac\u0131, i\u015f\u00e7ilik alacaklar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6detilmesine karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir.<br>Yerel mahkemece, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.<br>\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin kabul karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 daval\u0131 avukat\u0131 istinaf ba\u015fvurusunda bulunmu\u015ftur.<br>&#8230; B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 9. Hukuk Dairesi daval\u0131 daval\u0131 vekilinin istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun kabul\u00fc ile ilk derece mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve davan\u0131n reddine karar vermi\u015ftir.<br>Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki, alacak davas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 sonunda; ilamda yaz\u0131l\u0131 nedenlerle ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen miktar\u0131n faiziyle birlikte daval\u0131dan al\u0131narak davac\u0131ya verilmesine ili\u015fkin h\u00fckm\u00fcn s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde duru\u015fmal\u0131 olarak temyizen incelenmesi davac\u0131 avukat\u0131nca istenilmesi \u00fczerine dosya incelenerek i\u015fin duru\u015fmaya tabi oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve duru\u015fma i\u00e7in 25\/02\/2020 Sal\u0131 g\u00fcn\u00fc tayin edilerek taraflara \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 ka\u011f\u0131d\u0131 g\u00f6nderilmi\u015fti. Duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fc davac\u0131 ad\u0131na Avukat &#8230; ile kar\u015f\u0131 taraf ad\u0131na Avukat&#8230; geldiler. Duru\u015fmaya ba\u015flanarak haz\u0131r bulunan avukatlar\u0131n s\u00f6zl\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 dinlendikten sonra duru\u015fmaya son verilerek Tetkik Hakimi taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen rapor sunuldu, dosya incelendi gere\u011fi konu\u015fulup d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<br><br>YARGITAY KARARI<br>A) Davac\u0131 \u0130steminin \u00d6zeti:<br>Davac\u0131 vekili; m\u00fcvekkilinin, 21.02.2008-17.11.2014 tarihleri aras\u0131nda operasyon m\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fc olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, son d\u00f6nem ayl\u0131k br\u00fct \u00fccretinin 8.891,83 TL oldu\u011funu, daval\u0131 i\u015fverenlik taraf\u0131ndan bir k\u0131s\u0131m belgelerin imzalanmas\u0131 ko\u015fulu ile haklar\u0131n verilmesi sureti ile i\u015f akdinin feshedilebilece\u011finin bildirildi\u011fini, haklar\u0131n al\u0131nabilmesi i\u00e7in dayatma ile bu belgelerin imzalanmak zorunda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, i\u015f akdini haks\u0131z olarak fesheden daval\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131 ile genel tatil \u00fccretlerini \u00f6dedi\u011fini, fazla mesai \u00fccreti ile&nbsp;<mark>ihbar tazminat\u0131n\u0131n<\/mark>&nbsp;\u00f6denmedi\u011fini, bu alacaklar\u0131n talep edilmesine ra\u011fmen i\u015fverenlik\u00e7e verilmedi\u011fini, m\u00fcvekkilinin i\u015fe ilk girdi\u011fi y\u0131ldan itibaren saat 09.00 ile gece disko kapan\u0131\u015f saati olan 02.00 a kadar \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrerek;&nbsp;<mark>ihbar tazminat\u0131<\/mark>&nbsp;ile fazla mesai \u00fccretlerinin tahsiline karar verilmesini talep ve dava etmi\u015ftir.<br><br>B) Daval\u0131 Cevab\u0131n\u0131n \u00d6zeti:<br>Daval\u0131 vekili, davac\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcm taleplerinin zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131na u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, i\u015f akdinin i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan feshedildi\u011fi iddias\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fru olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015fyeri kurallar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 sebebi ile i\u015f akdinin devam\u0131n\u0131n imkans\u0131z hale geldi\u011fini bu sebeple davac\u0131 ile anla\u015f\u0131larak sunulan ibraname ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 belgede anla\u015f\u0131larak kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 olarak feshedildi\u011fini, i\u015fverenli\u011fin i\u015f akdini yasal olarak feshetme hakk\u0131 mevcut iken 7 y\u0131ld\u0131r birlikte \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131lan personel ile ihtilaf ya\u015famamak ad\u0131na k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131 \u00f6dendi\u011fini, kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 fesih sebebi ile her iki taraf lehine&nbsp;<mark>ihbar tazminat\u0131<\/mark>&nbsp;talep hakk\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131, operasyon m\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fc olup asgari \u00fccretin 7 kat\u0131 maa\u015f alan davac\u0131n\u0131n fazla mesai talebinin yasal dayana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ibraname ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 belge ile dava ve talep haklar\u0131ndan feragat edildi\u011fini, operasyon m\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn genel m\u00fcd\u00fcrden sonra otelde en yetkili \u015fah\u0131s oldu\u011funu, davac\u0131n\u0131n fazla mesai yapmas\u0131 konusunda kendisine verilmi\u015f s\u00f6zl\u00fc ya da yaz\u0131l\u0131 talimat bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n mesai saatlerini kendisinin ayarlad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131ya oda tahsis edildi\u011fini burada dinlendi\u011fini, davac\u0131n\u0131n dava hakk\u0131ndan feragat etti\u011fini, feragat sebebi ile davan\u0131n reddedilmesi gerekti\u011fini savunmu\u015ftur.<br>C) \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi Karar\u0131n\u0131n \u00d6zeti:<br>\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince; davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fcst d\u00fczey y\u00f6netici olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve davac\u0131n\u0131n&nbsp;<mark>ihbar tazminat\u0131na<\/mark>&nbsp;da hak kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esi ile davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.<br>D)\u0130stinaf ba\u015fvurusu:<br>\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 daval\u0131 vekili istinaf ba\u015fvurusunda bulunmu\u015ftur..<br>E)\u0130stinaf Sebepleri:<br>Daval\u0131 vekili istinaf dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; yerel mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n yerinde olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, i\u015f akdinin fesih talebinin davac\u0131dan geldi\u011fini, davac\u0131n\u0131n 19.11.2014 tarihli dilek\u00e7esi ile k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131 ve genel tatil \u00fccretlerinin \u00f6denmesi ko\u015fuluyla s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyi feshetmek istedi\u011fini yaz\u0131l\u0131 olarak beyan etti\u011fini, davac\u0131ya talepleri kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00f6dendi\u011fini, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin hakl\u0131 nedenle feshi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn iken m\u00fcvekkili \u015firket\u00e7e uzun y\u0131llard\u0131r \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131 olan davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015f akdinin ikale s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile feshedildi\u011fini, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin hukuka uygun ve ge\u00e7erli oldu\u011funu, bilirki\u015fi raporunda da ikale s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin davac\u0131n\u0131n lehine oldu\u011funun a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ifade edildi\u011fini, haklar\u0131n\u0131 alan davac\u0131 lehine fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma \u00fccreti h\u00fckmedilmesinin de hatal\u0131 oldu\u011funu, davac\u0131n\u0131n fiilen fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma yapmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, i\u015fyerinde \u00fcst d\u00fczey y\u00f6netici oldu\u011funu savunmu\u015ftur.<br>F)B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi Karar\u0131n\u0131n \u00d6zeti :<br>B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince; &#8220;..Davac\u0131 19\/11\/2014 tarihinde &#8220;21\/02\/2008 tarihinden itibaren i\u015fyerinizde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmaktay\u0131m. K\u0131dem tazminat\u0131m\u0131n ve genel tatil \u00fccretlerimin verilmesi ko\u015fulu ile kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 anla\u015fma\/sulh yolu ile ikale s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi imzalayarak s\u00f6zle\u015fmemi feshetmek istiyorum. \u0130\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmemin 19\/11\/2014 tarihi itibariyle sona erdirilmesini arz ve talep ederim.&#8221; \u015feklinde dilek\u00e7e vererek kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 anla\u015fma yolu ile i\u015f akdini sona erdirmek istemi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131n\u0131n bu talebi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda daval\u0131 i\u015fverence bunun kabul\u00fc ile taraflar aras\u0131nda ikale s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi kurulmu\u015ftur. Davac\u0131n\u0131n talebi do\u011frultusunda k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131 ve genel tatil \u00fccretleri eksiksiz \u00f6denmi\u015f ve davac\u0131 taraf\u00e7a daval\u0131 \u015firket ibra edilmi\u015ftir.<br>Davac\u0131 taraf iradesinin fesada u\u011frat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 da iddia etmemektedir.<br>\u0130\u015f akdinin ikale ile sonland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia eden daval\u0131 taraf\u0131n bu hususu y\u00f6ntemince yaz\u0131l\u0131 delille kan\u0131tlad\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131ya ili\u015fkin 19\/11\/2014 tarihli i\u015ften ayr\u0131l\u0131\u015f bildirgesinde \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f kodunun 22 olarak belirtildi\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131ya ait i\u015fyerinde operasyon m\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fc olup, \u00fcst d\u00fczey y\u00f6netici konumunda bulundu\u011fu, d\u00fczenledi\u011fi ve imzalad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belgelerin hukuki sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 bilebilecek durumda oldu\u011fu, kendi iste\u011fi ile ayr\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve istemi \u00fczerine i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin feshedildi\u011fi&#8221; \u015feklindeki gerek\u00e7e ile daval\u0131 vekilinin istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun kabul\u00fc ile \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131 kald\u0131r\u0131larak, davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<br><br>G)Temyiz ba\u015fvurusu :<br>B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi\u2019nin karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz ba\u015fvurusunda bulunulmu\u015ftur.<br>H) Gerek\u00e7e:<br>1-Dosyadaki yaz\u0131lara, toplanan delillerle karar\u0131n dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanuni gerektirici sebeplere g\u00f6re, davac\u0131n\u0131n a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki bentlerin kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan temyiz itirazlar\u0131 yerinde de\u011fildir.<br>2- Davac\u0131n\u0131n, fazla mesai \u00fccreti alaca\u011f\u0131na hak kazan\u0131p kazanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 noktas\u0131nda taraflar aras\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k bulunmaktad\u0131r.<br>Her ne kadar B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince, davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fcst d\u00fczey y\u00f6netici oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esi ile fazla mesai \u00fccreti alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015f ise de; dosya i\u00e7erisinde yer alan 10.04.2013 tarihli (davac\u0131n\u0131n da dahil oldu\u011fu m\u00fcd\u00fcrlerin talimatlara uymas\u0131 gerekti\u011fine ili\u015fkin) yaz\u0131, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 ve organizasyon \u015femas\u0131ndan davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fcst d\u00fczey \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131 kendisinin belirlemedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<br>Ayr\u0131ca, i\u015fverence; bir yandan davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fcst d\u00fczey y\u00f6netici oldu\u011fu ve fazla mesai yapmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 savunulmaktayken, bir yandan da savunma ile \u00e7eli\u015fki olu\u015fturacak \u015fekilde dayan\u0131lan ikale s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ve ibranamede de fazla mesai \u00fccretlerinin \u00f6dendi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<br>T\u00fcm bu hususlar birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; davac\u0131n\u0131n fazla mesai \u00fccretine hak kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131nda belirtilen miktar\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekirken reddine karar verilmesi hatal\u0131d\u0131r.<br>3- Davac\u0131n\u0131n,&nbsp;<mark>ihbar tazminat\u0131na<\/mark>&nbsp;hak kazan\u0131p kazanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 noktas\u0131nda taraflar aras\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k bulunmaktad\u0131r.<br>B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince; taraflar aras\u0131ndaki i\u015f akdinin ikale s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi ile sona erdi\u011fi, davac\u0131n\u0131n iradesinin feshada u\u011frat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etmedi\u011fi ve imzalad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belgenin hukuki sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 bilebilecek durumda oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7eleri ile \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131 kald\u0131r\u0131larak talebin reddine h\u00fckmedilmi\u015ftir.<br><strong>Cevap dilek\u00e7esindeki anlat\u0131mlar, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 ve di\u011fer bilgi ile belgelerden ikale icab\u0131n\u0131n i\u015fverenden geldi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131 ile k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131n\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra&nbsp;<mark>ihbar tazminat\u0131na<\/mark>&nbsp;h\u00fckmedilmesi gerekirken yan\u0131lg\u0131l\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde sonuca gidilmesi de hatal\u0131d\u0131r.<br><\/strong>I)Sonu\u00e7:<br>Temyiz olunan karar\u0131n, yukar\u0131da yaz\u0131l\u0131 sebeplerden dolay\u0131 BOZULMASINA, dava dosyas\u0131n\u0131n B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi&#8217;ne, karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi&#8217;ne g\u00f6nderilmesine, davac\u0131 yarar\u0131na takdir edilen 2.540,00 TL. duru\u015fma avukatl\u0131k paras\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa y\u00fckletilmesine, pe\u015fin al\u0131nan temyiz harc\u0131n\u0131n iste\u011fi halinde ilgilisine iadesine, 25\/02\/2020 g\u00fcn\u00fcnde oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<br><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>9. Hukuk Dairesi &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2018\/1949 E. &nbsp;, &nbsp;2020\/2950 K. &#8220;\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni&#8221; MAHKEMES\u0130 : &#8230; B\u00d6LGE ADL\u0130YE MAHKEMES\u0130 9. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 DAVA : Davac\u0131, i\u015f\u00e7ilik alacaklar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6detilmesine karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir.Yerel mahkemece, davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin kabul karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 daval\u0131 avukat\u0131 istinaf ba\u015fvurusunda bulunmu\u015ftur.&#8230; B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 9. Hukuk Dairesi daval\u0131 daval\u0131 vekilinin istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun kabul\u00fc [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1958,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1091","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-is-hukuku"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1091","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1091"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1091\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2004,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1091\/revisions\/2004"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1958"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1091"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1091"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1091"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}