The Court of Cassation has signed off on a notable decision regarding an employee who carried out activities on behalf of another company without obtaining permission from their employer. According to the report by Ahmet Kıvanç from Habertürk, the High Court ruled that it is not a requirement to prove that the employee obtained financial gain from this behavior, and that conduct contrary to the duty of honesty and loyalty is sufficient for a just cause termination.
According to the case file, an employee who had been working at a company for approximately five years was accused of making hotel reservations for a company belonging to their former employer, organizing meetings, continuing to use an email address from their former workplace, and taking an official from another company to city and intercity meetings using their current employer's vehicle during periods when they were on leave.
The employer terminated the employee's employment contract without severance pay due to these actions. The employee, claiming that the termination was unfair, filed a lawsuit demanding severance and notice pay.
The court of first instance, while acknowledging that the employee's behavior was of a nature to damage the trust relationship between the employee and the employer, ruled that severance and notice pay should be paid on the grounds that it could not be proven that the employee had gained any benefit from these actions. The regional court of justice also found this decision to be appropriate.
EMPHASIS ON THE DUTY OF LOYALTY IN THE DECISION
Reviewing the file upon the employer's appeal, the 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation overturned the decision of the lower courts. The Chamber stated that within the scope of acts contrary to the rules of morality and good faith regulated in Article 25/II of the Labor Law No. 4857, abuse of the employer's trust and behavior inconsistent with honesty and loyalty can constitute a just cause for termination.
In the Court of Cassation's decision, it was stated that it was established by the scope of the file that the employee made hotel reservations for an official of another firm without the knowledge of their current employer, continued to use an email address belonging to their former employer, conducted correspondence through this address, and used the company vehicle for the transportation of another firm's official to meetings.
The decision also drew attention to the provision in the employment contract stating, "Personnel cannot work for, become a partner in, or take on any role in any other organization or company without the written permission of the employer. The employer is free to grant or withhold permission."
The Court of Cassation concluded that when all these facts are evaluated together, the employee's behavior is incompatible with the rules of honesty and loyalty. According to the Chamber, it is not necessary for the employee to have necessarily obtained financial or other benefits for the employer to be considered justified in the termination.
For this reason, the Court of Cassation found it erroneous to accept the employee's claims for severance and notice pay when they should have been rejected. The decision revealed that in cases where there is a permission requirement in the employment contract, engaging in activities for another job or company without the employer's knowledge can lead to termination without severance pay.
News Source: 12punto
