Notification law in Turkey is implemented within the scope of the Notification Code No. 7201 and is closely related to many branches of law. With its formal structure, the Turkish Notification Law has important procedural consequences, from the accrual of administrative fines to the formation of parties in lawsuits, whether the notification is made duly and in accordance with the rules in the law.
The 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, which is the highest organ of the Turkish Judicial system, deals with labor and social security cases. The 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation has recently made an important decision regarding the importance of duly notification.
In the lawsuit filed to the 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation with the allegation that “uninterrupted trade union cuts from the employee’s salary is unlawful”, the decision to VOID FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE LAW is being given and being published in the Turkish Official Gazette dated 31th of December, 2022. In the final decision, since the union, which is a party to the lawsuit, was without a notification in accordance with the Law No. 7201 the previously finalised decision of the relevant labour court has been annulled.
The summary of the relevant Turkish Court of Cassition decision is as follows:
“The Notification Code No. 7201 and the provisions of the by-law enacted for the implementation of this law are purely formal and must be applied meticulously. Certificates of notification and other relevant documents related to the notifications made during the trial should be placed in the file. The judge should automatically check whether the notification made in a case has been duly made.
The notification to the legal entity (Trade Union) must be made in this way if it has an electronic address suitable for notification, otherwise, it must be made to the address of the Union registered in the Ministry of Labor and Social Security in accordance with the principles of 7201.
Failure of the notification (in the action) means that the formation of the party has not been duly ensured. In this case, it is clear that the defendant’s right to be heard, who is not informed about the trial, is violated.”
