{"id":1111,"date":"2020-06-15T18:38:58","date_gmt":"2020-06-15T15:38:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/hukuk.name\/?p=1111"},"modified":"2023-05-29T10:05:20","modified_gmt":"2023-05-29T10:05:20","slug":"kidem-tazminatina-esas-suresi-davacinin-sgk-kayitlarindaki-hizmet-suresi","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/2020\/06\/15\/kidem-tazminatina-esas-suresi-davacinin-sgk-kayitlarindaki-hizmet-suresi\/","title":{"rendered":"K\u0131dem tazminat\u0131: SGK kay\u0131tlar\u0131ndaki hizmet s\u00fcresi"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>22. Hukuk Dairesi &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2020\/608 E. &nbsp;, &nbsp;2020\/2613 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\">MAHKEMES\u0130 :\u0130\u015f Mahkemesi<br>DAVA T\u00dcR\u00dc : ALACAK<br><br><br>Taraflar aras\u0131nda g\u00f6r\u00fclen dava sonucunda verilen karar\u0131n, temyizen incelenmesi daval\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan istenilmekle, temyiz talebinin s\u00fcresinde oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131. Dava dosyas\u0131 i\u00e7in Tetkik Hakimi &#8230; taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen rapor dinlendikten sonra dosya incelendi, gere\u011fi konu\u015fulup d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<br><br>Y A R G I T A Y K A R A R I<br><br>Davac\u0131 \u0130steminin \u00d6zeti:<br>Davac\u0131 vekili, davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015f akdine i\u015fverence haks\u0131z olarak son verildi\u011fini, i\u015fe iade talepli a\u00e7t\u0131klar\u0131 davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verildi\u011fini ve Yarg\u0131tayca feshin ge\u00e7erli nedene dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esi ile h\u00fckm\u00fcn ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015f\u00e7ilik alacaklar\u0131n\u0131n tahsili i\u00e7in &#8230; 12. \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 2013\/1744 esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131 ile ilams\u0131z icra takibine ge\u00e7ti\u011fini, ancak i\u015fverenin haks\u0131z itiraz\u0131 sebebi ile takibin durdu\u011funu belirterek, daval\u0131n\u0131n yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 haks\u0131z itiraz\u0131n iptaline, takibin devam\u0131na, daval\u0131n\u0131n %20 den a\u015fa\u011f\u0131 olmamak \u00fczere icra inkar tazminat\u0131na mahkum edilmesini istemi\u015ftir.<br>Daval\u0131lar Cevaplar\u0131n\u0131n \u00d6zeti:<br>Daval\u0131, davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesini istemi\u015ftir.<br>Mahkeme Karar\u0131n\u0131n \u00d6zeti:<br>Mahkemece, bozma sonras\u0131nda toplanan kan\u0131tlar ve bilirki\u015fi raporuna dayan\u0131larak itiraz\u0131n k\u0131smen iptaline karar verilmi\u015ftir.<br>Temyiz:<br>Karar\u0131 daval\u0131 vekili temyiz etmi\u015ftir.<br>Gerek\u00e7e:<br>1-Dosyadaki yaz\u0131lara toplanan delillerle karar\u0131n dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanuni gerektirici sebeplere g\u00f6re, daval\u0131n\u0131n a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki bendin kapsam\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki di\u011fer temyiz itirazlar\u0131 yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.<br>2-Anayasas\u0131\u2019n\u0131n 138. ve 141. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca Hakimler, Anayasaya, Kanuna ve hukuka uygun olarak vicdan\u0131 kanaatlerine g\u00f6re h\u00fck\u00fcm verirler ve b\u00fct\u00fcn mahkemelerin her t\u00fcrl\u00fc kararlar\u0131 gerek\u00e7eli olarak yaz\u0131l\u0131r. Bu gerek\u00e7e de hukuki esaslara ve kurallara dayanmal\u0131, nedenleri a\u00e7\u0131klanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Di\u011fer taraftan 01.10.2011 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun 27. maddesinde hukuki dinlenilme hakk\u0131 kurala ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Hukuk\u00ee dinlenilme hakk\u0131, Anayasan\u0131n 36. maddesinde ve Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin 6. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n en \u00f6nemli unsurudur. &#8220;Hukuki Dinlenilme Hakk\u0131&#8221; gere\u011fince davan\u0131n taraflar\u0131, m\u00fcdahiller ve yarg\u0131laman\u0131n di\u011fer ilgilileri, kendi haklar\u0131 ile ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak hukuki dinlenilme hakk\u0131na sahip olup, bu hakk\u0131n yarg\u0131lama ile ilgili olarak bilgi sahibi olunmas\u0131n\u0131, a\u00e7\u0131klama ve ispat hakk\u0131n\u0131, mahkemenin, a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 dikkate alarak de\u011ferlendirmesini ve kararlar\u0131n somut ve a\u00e7\u0131k olarak gerek\u00e7elendirilmesini i\u00e7ermektedir. Mahkemeler, kararlar\u0131n\u0131 somut ve a\u00e7\u0131k bir \u015fekilde gerek\u00e7elendirmek zorundad\u0131rlar. Eksik, \u015fekl\u00ee ve g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015fte gerek\u00e7e yaz\u0131lmas\u0131 adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n (hukuk\u00ee dinlenilme hakk\u0131n\u0131n), ihl\u00e2lidir.<br>Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun 297. maddesinde de, verilecek h\u00fck\u00fcmde taraflar\u0131n iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6zetinin, anla\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131 ve anla\u015famad\u0131klar\u0131 hususlar\u0131n, \u00e7eki\u015fmeli vak\u0131alar hakk\u0131nda toplanan delillerin, delillerin tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 ve de\u011ferlendirilmesinin, sabit g\u00f6r\u00fclen vak\u0131alarla bunlardan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan sonu\u00e7 ve hukuki sebeplerin yer almas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde maddi olay saptanmal\u0131, hukuki niteli\u011fi ve uygulanacak hukuki kurallar belirlenmeli, bu konuda gerekli inceleme ve delillerden s\u00f6z edilmeli, hukuk kurallar\u0131 somut olaya uygulanmal\u0131 ve sonunda h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmal\u0131d\u0131r. Maddi olgularla h\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kras\u0131 aras\u0131ndaki hukuki ba\u011flant\u0131 da ancak bu \u015fekilde kurulabilecek, ayr\u0131ca yasal unsurlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yan bu gerek\u00e7e sayesinde, kararlar\u0131n do\u011frulu\u011funun denetlenebilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olacakt\u0131r.<br>Somut uyu\u015fmazl\u0131kta mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma s\u00fcresinin neden tam s\u00fcreli olarak kabul edilmesi gerekti\u011fine dair Anayasa ve yasal mevzuat\u0131n arad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anlamda herhangi bir gerek\u00e7e i\u00e7ermedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmakla, an\u0131lan alacaklar konusunda verilen karar\u0131n temyiz mercii taraf\u0131ndan denetimi de olanaks\u0131zd\u0131r. Yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisi Anayasas\u0131\u2019n\u0131n 141. maddesinin amac\u0131na, 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu&#8217;nun 297. ve 298\/2. maddelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fundan karar\u0131n bu nedenle bozulmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir.<br>3-Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere; 6100 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanununda &#8220;usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak&#8221; kavram\u0131na ili\u015fkin a\u00e7\u0131k bir h\u00fck\u00fcm bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Bu kurum, davalar\u0131n uzamas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemek, hukuki alanda istikrar sa\u011flamak ve kararlara kar\u015f\u0131 genel g\u00fcvenin sars\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemek amac\u0131yla Yarg\u0131tay uygulamalar\u0131 ile geli\u015ftirilmi\u015f, \u00f6\u011fretide kabul g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f ve usul hukukunun vazge\u00e7ilmez, ana ilkelerinden biri haline gelmi\u015ftir. Anlam itibariyle, bir davada, mahkemenin ya da taraflar\u0131n yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu bir usul i\u015flemi ile taraflardan biri lehine do\u011fmu\u015f ve kendisine uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu olan hakk\u0131 ifade etmektedir.Bir mahkemenin Yarg\u0131tay Dairesince verilen bozma karar\u0131na uymas\u0131 sonunda, kendisi i\u00e7in o kararda g\u00f6sterilen \u015fekilde inceleme ve ara\u015ft\u0131rma yaparak, yine o kararda belirtilen hukuki esaslar gere\u011fince h\u00fck\u00fcm verme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc do\u011far. \u201cUsuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak\u201d olarak tan\u0131mlayaca\u011f\u0131m\u0131z bu olgu mahkemeye, h\u00fckm\u00fcne uydu\u011fu Yarg\u0131tay bozma karar\u0131nda belirtilen \u00e7er\u00e7evede i\u015flem yapma ve h\u00fck\u00fcm kurma zorunlulu\u011fu getirdi\u011fi gibi, mahkemenin karar\u0131n\u0131 bozmu\u015f olan Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Dairesince de, sonradan, ilk bozma karar\u0131 ile benimsemi\u015f oldu\u011fu esaslara usuli kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hakka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir \u015fekilde ikinci bir bozma karar\u0131 verilememektedir (09.05.1960 g\u00fcn ve 21\/9 say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131, Hukuk Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 12.07.2006 g\u00fcn, 2006\/9-508 E., 2006\/521 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131).<br>Somut olayda, Dairemizin ilk bozma ilam\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131smi s\u00fcreli mi yoksa tam s\u00fcreli mi \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesi ve davac\u0131n\u0131n y\u0131ll\u0131k izin alaca\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden davac\u0131n\u0131n i\u015fe ba\u015flama s\u00fcresi dikkate al\u0131narak alacaklar\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesi gerekti\u011fi gerek\u00e7esi ile mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. Mahkemece bozma sonras\u0131nda bilirki\u015fiden ek rapor al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f ve ek raporda davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131smi s\u00fcreli olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011finin ifade edilmesi nedeni ile bu rapor h\u00fckme esas al\u0131narak davac\u0131n\u0131n tam s\u00fcreli olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmi\u015f, y\u0131ll\u0131k izin alaca\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ise herhangi bir incelem yap\u0131lmadan \u00f6nceki gibi karar verilmi\u015ftir. Ancak yerel mahkemenin bu kabul\u00fc yukar\u0131da izah edildi\u011fi gibi yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu dosya kapsam\u0131na da uygun de\u011fildir. Zira, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan dosyada tan\u0131k dinletilmemi\u015f, dinlenen daval\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n yar\u0131 zamanl\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015flerdir. Dosya i\u00e7indeki davac\u0131n\u0131n imzas\u0131 olan s\u00f6zle\u015fmelere g\u00f6re davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00fccretinin \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 saate g\u00f6re belirlenece\u011fi ve amirinin \u00e7a\u011f\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00fcnlerde ve saatlerde \u00e7al\u0131\u015faca\u011f\u0131, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma saatinin de amiri taraf\u0131ndan belirlenece\u011fi d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f olup, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye bug\u00fcne kadar bir itirazda da bulunulmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yine dosya kapsam\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n tam s\u00fcreli \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair bir delil dosyaya sunulmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Davac\u0131n\u0131n SGK kay\u0131tlar\u0131na g\u00f6re tam s\u00fcreli bir hizmet bildiriminin yer almad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Mahkemece i\u015f hukukunda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma olgusunu ve hizmet s\u00fcresini ispat y\u00fck\u00fcn\u00fcn, bunu iddia eden i\u015f\u00e7iye d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc g\u00f6z ard\u0131 edilerek h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 hatal\u0131 olmu\u015ftur. \u00d6te yandan davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan puantaj kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n getirtilmesini talep etti\u011fi halde bu talep hakk\u0131nda da olumlu ve olumsuz bir karar da verilmemi\u015ftir. Mahkemece \u00f6ncelikle davac\u0131n\u0131n delil olarak dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015fyerindeki puantaj kay\u0131tlar\u0131 getirtilerek davac\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131smi s\u00fcreli mi yoksa tam s\u00fcreli mi \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilmelidir. Eksik inceleme ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi hatal\u0131 olmu\u015ftur.<br>Davac\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131smi s\u00fcreli \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan oldu\u011funu tespit edilmesi halinde, ilk bozma ilam\u0131nda belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere, davaya konu Toplu \u0130\u015f S\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin 6\/c maddesinde yer alan part time \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan i\u015f\u00e7ilerin ayr\u0131ca toplu i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesindeki bu yard\u0131mlardan yararlanamayaca\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin d\u00fczenlemenin, daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan bu d\u00fczenlemeyi hakl\u0131 k\u0131lan bir nedenin bulundu\u011fu ispat edilemedi\u011finden ge\u00e7ersiz oldu\u011fu kabul edilerek, davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma s\u00fcresi ile orant\u0131l\u0131 olarak Toplu i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinden yararlanaca\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmelidir.<br>Davac\u0131n\u0131n tam s\u00fcreli \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan oldu\u011funun belirlenmesi halinde ise, 01.10.2006-30.09.2008, 01.10.2008 &#8211; 30.09.2010 d\u00f6nemlerinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan Toplu \u0130\u015f S\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde part time personel gruplar\u0131 belirlenmi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131 personel Grup A kapsam\u0131nda kalmakta olup \u00fccret d\u00f6k\u00fcm\u00fc de ilgili Toplu \u0130\u015f S\u00f6zle\u015fmelerine eklenmi\u015ftir. \u0130\u015fverence, davac\u0131 k\u0131smi s\u00fcreli \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan kabul edildi\u011finden bu d\u00f6k\u00fcme g\u00f6re \u00fccret \u00f6demesi yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u00dccret \u00e7\u0131plak \u00fccret+ vardiya primi+ ikramiye+ senelik izin ve bayram olarak belirlenmi\u015ftir. \u00d6rne\u011fin 30.09.2009 tarihine kadar \u00f6rnek Grup A \u00fccret d\u00f6k\u00fcm\u00fcne g\u00f6re k\u0131sm\u0131 s\u00fcreli \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan i\u015f\u00e7inin \u00fccreti 1.562,42 TL olup bu \u00fccret; \u00c7\u0131plak \u00dccret: 1.122,86 TL+Vardiya primi(ikili): 31,66 TL+\u0130kramiye: 374,29 TL+Senelik \u0130zin ve Bayram: 33,61 TL&#8217;den olu\u015fmaktad\u0131r. Davac\u0131n\u0131n 10\/2008 \u2013 9\/2009 aras\u0131 d\u00f6nem \u00fccret bordrolar\u0131na g\u00f6re de davac\u0131n\u0131n birim \u00fccreti Toplu \u0130\u015f S\u00f6zle\u015fmesi&#8217;nde belirlenen \u015fekilde br\u00fct 1.562,42 TL&#8217;dir.<br>Toplu \u0130\u015f S\u00f6zle\u015fmesi&#8217;nin 6\/c maddede i\u015f\u00e7inin \u00fccreti i\u00e7inde vardiya primi, ikramiye, senelik izin ve bayram alacaklar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6denmesi kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, part time \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan i\u015f\u00e7ilerin ayr\u0131ca Toplu \u0130\u015f S\u00f6zle\u015fmesi&#8217;ndeki bu yard\u0131mlardan yararlanamayaca\u011f\u0131 d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Ancak davac\u0131n\u0131n tam s\u00fcreli \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan oldu\u011fu tespit edilmesi halinde, davac\u0131n\u0131n tam s\u00fcreli \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan i\u015f\u00e7i gibi almas\u0131 gereken ikramiye, senelik izin ve bayram yard\u0131m alacaklar\u0131 hesaplanmal\u0131 ancak i\u015f\u00e7iye \u00fccreti i\u00e7inde \u00f6denen vardiya primi, ikramiye, senelik izin ve bayram alacaklar\u0131n\u0131n mahsubu ile fark alacaklar tespit edilmelidir. Nitekim, mahkemece uyulan bozma ilam\u0131nda da davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma \u015feklinin belirlenerek sonucuna g\u00f6re h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<br><strong>Mahkemece, belirtilen \u015fekilde mahsup yap\u0131lmadan ikramiye, senelik izin ve bayram alacaklar\u0131n\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fckerrer \u00f6demeye neden olaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6zetilmemesi hatal\u0131 olup bozma nedenidir.<br>Yine davac\u0131n\u0131n&nbsp;<mark>k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131na<\/mark>&nbsp;esas s\u00fcresi de, davac\u0131n\u0131n SGK kay\u0131tlar\u0131ndaki hizmet s\u00fcresi 9 y\u0131l 25 g\u00fcn oldu\u011fu ve davac\u0131n\u0131n talebi gere\u011fi 15.01\/2003-27.05.2010 tarihleri aras\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131n kesintisiz oldu\u011fu kabul edilerek ve hizmet cetvelinde g\u00f6r\u00fclen s\u00fcrenin aksine 11 y\u0131l 5 ay 3 g\u00fcn oldu\u011fu ihtimallerine g\u00f6re hesaplanm\u0131\u015f, mahkemece davac\u0131n\u0131n talebi dikkate al\u0131narak 11 y\u0131l 5 ay 3 g\u00fcn \u00fczerinden&nbsp;<mark>hesaplama<\/mark>&nbsp;yapan k\u0131s\u0131m tercih edilmi\u015ftir. \u00c7al\u0131\u015fma olgusunu ve s\u00fcresini ispat y\u00fck\u00fcn\u00fcn davac\u0131da oldu\u011fu dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, davac\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131 i\u015fyerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu fiili hizmet s\u00fcresi ve prime esas g\u00fcnleri dikkate al\u0131narak,&nbsp;<mark>k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131na<\/mark>&nbsp;esas s\u00fcresinin 9 y\u0131l 25 g\u00fcn oldu\u011fu kabul edilmelidir. An\u0131lan y\u00f6nler g\u00f6zeltilmeksizin eksik inceleme ile yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi hatal\u0131 olup bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015ftir.<\/strong><br>\u0130kinci bozma sonras\u0131nda yap\u0131lacak yarg\u0131lamada, ikinci bozmaya konu karar\u0131n davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmedi\u011fi g\u00f6z ard\u0131 edilmemelidir.<br>SONU\u00c7: Temyiz olunan karar\u0131n, yukar\u0131da yaz\u0131l\u0131 sebeplerden dolay\u0131 BOZULMASINA, pe\u015fin al\u0131nan temyiz harc\u0131n\u0131n istek halinde ilgiliye iadesine, 17.02.2020 tarihinde oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>22. Hukuk Dairesi &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2020\/608 E. &nbsp;, &nbsp;2020\/2613 K. &#8220;\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni&#8221; MAHKEMES\u0130 :\u0130\u015f MahkemesiDAVA T\u00dcR\u00dc : ALACAK Taraflar aras\u0131nda g\u00f6r\u00fclen dava sonucunda verilen karar\u0131n, temyizen incelenmesi daval\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan istenilmekle, temyiz talebinin s\u00fcresinde oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131. Dava dosyas\u0131 i\u00e7in Tetkik Hakimi &#8230; taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen rapor dinlendikten sonra dosya incelendi, gere\u011fi konu\u015fulup d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc: Y A R G I [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1876,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[25,15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1111","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-111-kidem-tazminati","category-isci-tazminatlari-ve-alacaklari"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1111","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\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1111"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1111\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1912,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1111\/revisions\/1912"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1876"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1111"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1111"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1111"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}