Evidence in Labor Law

Evidence in Labor Law – Labor Law Attorney in Izmir

Everyone who is a party to a lawsuit has the right to prove their case in accordance with the time limits and procedures specified by law. The Civil Code also stipulates that, unless otherwise provided by law, each party is obligated to prove the existence of the facts upon which their claim is based. The Code of Civil Procedure includes a regulation parallel to the general rule in the Civil Code regarding the proof of claims. The Code of Civil Procedure stipulates that, unless there is a specific provision in the law, the burden of proof rests with the party who derives a right in their favor from the legal consequences attached to the alleged fact. 

The burden of proof is... HMK's 190. Article 6 of the Turkish Civil Code, which is structured in parallel with Article 6 of the Turkish Civil Code, states that the burden of proof rests with the party who benefits from the legal consequences attached to the alleged fact. However, the article also notes that the contrary may be stipulated in special laws. 

HMK Article 194. The article imposes the burden of concretizing the facts. The reasoning states that lawsuits cannot be filed and conducted with general statements without relying on concrete facts. For example, claiming severance pay, notice pay, vacation pay, overtime pay, etc., based on the statement that the plaintiff worked at the workplace for a long time and was not paid their legal rights, without specifying who terminated the employment and how, is not in accordance with the law. In such a case, the judge must clarify the case within the scope of Article 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 

In labor law disputes, parties attempt to prove their claims using numerous means. Commonly encountered methods include: Social Security records, expert opinions, witness testimonies, oaths, payroll records, documents related to overtime work, release agreements, employment contracts, promissory notes according to the Code of Civil Procedure, the absence of a final judgment, and admissions and oaths are considered conclusive evidence. Witness testimonies, expert opinions, on-site inspections, and expert opinions are discretionary forms of evidence. In cases requiring specialized or technical knowledge outside the realm of law, the court may decide to obtain the opinion of an expert. The judge is not obligated to base their decision solely on the expert's report; they may issue different rulings, providing their own reasoning.  

In labor law, one of the most important means of proof is witness testimony. Besides written evidence, the witness is the person who best knows the workings of the workplace and is aware of all events through their senses. For this reason, witness testimony holds a special place in labor law. If the witness presented by the plaintiff has a conflict of interest with the defendant, that witness's testimony cannot be relied upon. In particular, the statements of a witness who does not work at the workplace, is unaware of the working conditions, is not familiar with workplace practices, and has no knowledge of the operation should not be taken as the basis for a decision. In such a case, the testimony of such a witness will not be considered credible, and if the plaintiff has no other evidence, the case will unfortunately be dismissed. 

To give an example; 

• The burden of proof regarding the employee's working hours, overtime hours, work on holidays, and the amount of wages received rests with the employee. However, the burden of proof that the employee's wages have been paid, that they have taken their paid leave, and that they have been paid for any overtime work performed, rests with the employer.  
• The party claiming to have signed the resignation or release document under duress will have to prove it. In a lawsuit, the burden of proof rests with the employee who claims that their free will was compromised and that they were forced to sign the resignation documents, or that they signed these documents under mobbing and fear of losing their job. Otherwise, the case will be dismissed due to lack of proof, and the employee will suffer a loss of rights. A release document drawn up by a notary public is considered valid evidence until proven otherwise. 
• In cases where the duration of employment is disputed in the specified manner, the employer's insurance records alone constitute irrefutable presumption that the employment was performed in that manner. 

Other works we have prepared within the scope of Labor Law;

Izmir Employment Lawyer

Address: Nergis Neighborhood, Girne Boulevard No: 83, Floor 2, Apartment 2, Karşıyaka, İzmir

E-mail: info@efeshukuk.com

Phone: +90 534 415 52 56