With its decision numbered 1495 dated 2026, the 9th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals made an important provision regarding annual leaves, which constitute an important issue of dispute in working life.
There are legal practices stating that leaves taken for less than 10 days will be considered a justified reason for termination, and some employees were terminating their employment contracts for this reason. In a dispute before it, the Supreme Court ruled that "annual leaves taken for periods of less than 10 days upon the request and consent of the employee will not constitute a justified reason for termination on their own."
According to the case file, the plaintiff worker worked as an assistant customs consultant in the defendant company between December 16, 2013 and April 27, 2022. The worker claimed that his annual leave requests were rejected during his working period, citing the intensity of work, that he was allowed a maximum of six days of leave at a time, and that he was not paid for his unused leaves. In the petition, the worker stated that he had 68 days of unused annual leave and argued that he terminated his employment contract for justified reasons because his annual leaves were not used as required. He also claimed that his premiums for the second half of 2017 and 2020 were not paid. Employee; He demanded that his severance pay, annual paid leave and premium receivables be collected from the employer.
FIRST DEGREE COURT FOUND THE EMPLOYEE RIGHT
The First Instance Court determined that the worker took a total of 48 days of annual leave, according to the signed leave request forms. The court accepted that the worker was entitled to a total of 130 days of annual leave according to his seniority and had 82 days of unused leave. Concluding that the annual leaves were not used as required, the Court decided that the employee terminated the contract for just cause. For this reason, severance pay and 82 days of annual leave pay were stipulated. This request was rejected because the worker could not prove that he would receive a bonus.
The 9th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals annulled the decision of the Regional Court of Justice and overturned the decision of the First Instance Court. The reversal decision focused on the following three issues: Short-Term Leaves Alone were not Considered as a Reason for Justified Termination.
IT CANNOT BE DIVIDED ACCORDING TO THE LAW, BUT THERE WAS THE WORKER'S CONSENT
According to Article 56 of the Labor Law No. 4857, annual paid leave cannot be divided by the employer. In case of division by agreement of the parties, one of the leaves should not be less than 10 days. The Supreme Court accepted that in the concrete case, the periods stated in the permits were less than 10 days. However, it determined that these leaves were divided upon the request and consent of the worker. In the decision, it was stated that it could not be proven that the employee notified the employer in writing at least one month in advance that he wanted to take longer leave and that this request was reduced to a shorter period by the employer. It has not been proven that the employer did not provide any leave for a very long time or rejected the employee's request for leave without justification. The 9th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals stated that, according to its established practice, annual leave is valid if it is used for periods of less than 10 days upon the request of the worker. For this reason, it decided that the employee's termination was not based on just cause and that his request for severance pay should be rejected.
