Supreme Court Decisions
The plaintiff amended their claim regarding overtime pay, bonuses, child, family, education, transportation, and fuel allowances, based on the expert report obtained by the court. The defendant employer, in its timely written objection to the amendment, raised the defense of statute of limitations. According to Article 126/3 of the Code of Obligations, lawsuits relating to employee wages are subject to a 5-year statute of limitations. Overtime pay, bonuses, child, family, education, transportation, and fuel allowances are among these types of claims. Therefore, the portion of the overtime pay, bonuses, child, family, education, transportation, and fuel allowances requested in the amendment that falls outside the 5-year period prior to the amendment date is time-barred. The court’s task is to determine the claims for overtime pay, bonuses, child, family, education, travel, and fuel allowances, which are requested through amendment and are not subject to the statute of limitations, by obtaining an additional expert report if necessary, and to make a decision regarding these claims based on the resulting findings. (9th Civil Chamber, 2009/26776 E. 2009/36953 K. 24.12.2009)
…The plaintiff proved that he worked overtime and received voyage bonuses during his employment as a seaman before November 19, 2003. In his lawsuit, the plaintiff requested 100 TL for overtime pay and 100 TL for voyage bonuses. The lawsuit was filed on September 9, 2005. Following the expert’s calculation of the labor claims, the plaintiff amended his claim on April 17, 2009. The defendant then raised the defense of statute of limitations. According to both Article 126/3 of the repealed Law No. 818 on Obligations and Article 147/1 of the Law No. 6098 on Obligations, which came into force on July 1, 2012, lawsuits relating to employee wages are subject to a 5-year statute of limitations. Overtime and travel bonus claims are among these types of claims. Therefore, the portion of the overtime and travel bonus claims requested through amendment that falls outside the 5-year period preceding the date of amendment and exceeds the amount requested in the original lawsuit is time-barred. The court’s rejection of the 100 TL overtime and 100 TL travel bonus claims, which were requested in the original lawsuit and are not time-barred, is erroneous. 9th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2011/35376 E. 2013/28177 K. November 5, 2013