The Supreme Court’s decision dated 10 July 2024 addresses the procedural and substantive implications of amendments introduced during the litigation process in cases involving employment receivables. The case highlights critical constitutional issues, such as ensuring compliance with procedural law, safeguarding the right to a fair trial, and maintaining legal security for all parties involved. The decision provides clarity on the permissible scope of such amendments and their impact on labor disputes.

The subject of the case concerns the recalculation and amendment of claims for employment receivables during an ongoing labor dispute. The amendments, which were introduced by one of the parties during the trial process, raised questions about their compliance with procedural law and the broader implications for fairness and justice in labor law disputes. The Court examined whether these amendments could be deemed lawful and whether they adhered to principles ensuring procedural fairness and substantive justice for both employers and employees.

The applicant alleged that the procedural amendments (“amendment”) introduced during the trial violated legal standards and infringed upon constitutional rights. Specifically, the claims centered on:

• Whether the amendments distorted the legal process or unfairly disadvantaged one party.
• The possibility that such amendments undermined the principle of legal certainty, thereby breaching the right to a fair trial.
• Concerns that the amendments could jeopardize the equitable treatment of claims, particularly regarding the recalculation of employment receivables.

The applicant argued that these procedural adjustments had a material impact on the case’s outcome and challenged the adequacy of safeguards protecting their fundamental rights during the litigation process.

The Supreme Court’s analysis involved an extensive review of the procedural and substantive dimensions of the amendments, within the framework of Turkish labor law and constitutional principles. Key aspects of the evaluation included:

• Procedural Compliance:
  • The Court assessed whether the amendments adhered to procedural laws and whether they were introduced within the permissible timeframe. It examined the procedural safeguards available to the opposing party to ensure fairness during the trial process.
• Balancing Rights:
  • The Court explored how the amendments impacted the rights of both parties, particularly in balancing procedural fairness for employers and substantive justice for employees. The analysis included considerations of the employees’ right to claim receivables and whether procedural integrity was compromised.
• Fundamental Rights Violations:
  • The Court evaluated the potential infringement of constitutional rights, such as legal certainty and access to justice. It examined whether the amendments created an environment where one party was disproportionately disadvantaged or whether they violated the broader principles of equality and fairness in judicial proceedings.
• Judicial Precedent and Labor Law Principles:
  • The decision referenced key precedents and principles in Turkish labor law, emphasizing the importance of ensuring that procedural tools, such as “amendment,” do not become instruments of abuse or inequity within the judicial system.

The Supreme Court ultimately determined that procedural amendments, if introduced in compliance with legal requirements, do not inherently violate the constitutional rights of either party. However, it emphasized the critical role of procedural integrity in maintaining a fair trial. The Court underscored the following conclusions:

• Procedural amendments should serve the purpose of clarifying and advancing claims without undermining the rights of the opposing party.
• Workers’ rights to claim their receivables must be safeguarded within the boundaries of legal and procedural rules.
• The principles of legal certainty and access to justice must remain at the forefront of all judicial processes.

This decision provides significant guidance on the proper application of procedural amendments in labor disputes, ensuring that judicial outcomes are equitable, consistent with constitutional guarantees, and respectful of procedural integrity. It also reinforces the importance of safeguarding workers’ rights in a manner that aligns with the principles of justice and fairness.