T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
CAFER ORU\u00c7 BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/3130)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 4\/2\/2025<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Basri BA\u011eCI<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Engin YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Metin KIRATLI<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Eren Can BENAKAY<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Cafer ORU\u00c7<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Muhammet Polat \u0130\u00c7TEN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, i\u015f\u00e7i alacaklar\u0131n\u0131n tahsili amac\u0131yla a\u00e7\u0131lan davada, davan\u0131n sonucuna etkili iddialar\u0131n kararda kar\u015f\u0131lanmamas\u0131 nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucu 27\/9\/2014 ile 12\/1\/2018 tarihleri aras\u0131nda \u00f6n muhasebe g\u00f6revlisi olarak asgari \u00fccret kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu i\u015f akdini tek tarafl\u0131 olarak feshettikten sonra dini bayramlar\u0131n birinci g\u00fcn\u00fc ve arefe g\u00fcnleri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda t\u00fcm tatil g\u00fcnlerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma ve di\u011fer \u00fccretlerinin \u00f6denmemi\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeni ile i\u015fi b\u0131rakt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ancak psikolojik bask\u0131 nedeni ile istifa dilek\u00e7esi vermek zorunda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131, fazla mesai alaca\u011f\u0131 ve ulusal bayram genel tatil alaca\u011f\u0131na karar verilmesi amac\u0131yla 30\/7\/2018 tarihinde dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurucu dava dilek\u00e7esinde, haftan\u0131n alt\u0131 g\u00fcn\u00fc, ulusal bayram ve genel tatillerde, dini bayramlarda ise arefe ve bayram\u0131n birinci g\u00fcn\u00fc hari\u00e7 \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. \u015eirket i\u00e7i elektronik postalar\u0131n \u015fahsi hesab\u0131 \u00fczerinden at\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, elektronik postalar incelendi\u011finde hangi g\u00fcnler ne kadar \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ispatlanaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmi\u015ftir. Bu hususun tan\u0131k ile de ispatlanabilece\u011fini dile getirmi\u015ftir. \u0130\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan fazla mesai \u00fccretinin \u00f6denece\u011fi s\u00f6zl\u00fc olarak belirtilmesine kar\u015f\u0131n bu s\u00f6z\u00fcn yerine getirilmedi\u011fini aktarm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Psikolojik olarak bask\u0131 alt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak istifa etti\u011fini, bu nedenle istifas\u0131nda “ailevi sebepler ile istifa ediyorum” \u015feklinde ucu a\u00e7\u0131k, genel bir ifade yazd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
4. Diyarbak\u0131r 4. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi(Mahkeme) konuya ili\u015fkin bilirki\u015fi incelemesine ba\u015fvurmu\u015f ve 22\/8\/2019 tarihli rapor d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Raporda, daval\u0131 taraftan, ba\u015fvurucunun \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcre zarf\u0131nda kullanm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu bilgisayarlara ait hard diskler ile bilgisayar\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u015f kapan\u0131\u015f saatlerinin tutuldu\u011fu i\u00e7 a\u011f sistemi ve mevcut olmas\u0131 durumunda bilgisayar a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u015f kapan\u0131\u015f saatlerini belirten log kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n gerekli inceleme yap\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in istenilmesi gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fahsi elektronik posta adresi \u00fczerinde yap\u0131lan incelemede bir tak\u0131m hesap raporlar\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6nderildi\u011finin tespit edildi\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Mahkeme 21\/11\/2019 tarihinde davay\u0131 k\u0131smen kabul etmi\u015f ve ba\u015fvurucuya k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131 ile ulusal bayram genel tatil \u00fccret alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6denmesine, fazla mesai alaca\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ise davan\u0131n reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde;<\/p>\n
i. \u0130\u015f\u00e7inin istifa dilek\u00e7esinde fesih nedenlerini a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtmemesinin hakl\u0131 fesih sebeplerini ortadan kald\u0131rmayaca\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucuya ulusal bayram genel tatil \u00fccretlerinin \u00f6denmemesi ve ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan i\u015f akdi hakl\u0131 nedenle sona erdirilmemesi nedeniyle k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6denmesi gerekti\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
ii. Dosyada yer alan deliller ve tan\u0131k ifadesinden ba\u015fvurucunun ulusal bayram tatil g\u00fcnlerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. \u0130spat y\u00fck\u00fc \u00fczerinde olan i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan bayram tatilinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda hak edilen \u00fccretin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00f6dendi\u011finin ispat edilemedi\u011fi ve bu nedenle ba\u015fvurucunun s\u00f6z konusu alaca\u011fa hak kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
iii. Son olarak i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan sunulan \u00fccret bordrolar\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan imzalanm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu ve bordrolarda fazla mesai tahakkukunun bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Fazla mesai yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan ispatlanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fiancak ba\u015fvurucunun bu hususu ispat edemedi\u011fi ifade edilerek fazla mesai alaca\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden davan\u0131n reddedilmesi gerekti\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu karara kar\u015f\u0131 31\/1\/2020 tarihinde istinaf yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. \u0130stinaf dilek\u00e7esinde, fazla mesai alaca\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden tan\u0131k dinletildi\u011fini ve \u015fahsi elektronik posta adresinden g\u00f6ndermi\u015f oldu\u011fu elektronik postalar\u0131n delil olarak sunuldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir. S\u00f6z konusu delillerin di\u011fer alacaklar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, lehine h\u00fckmedilen alacaklar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden dikkate al\u0131n\u0131rken fazla mesai alaca\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden dikkate al\u0131nmamas\u0131n\u0131n haks\u0131z ve hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu ifade etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Daval\u0131 i\u015fveren 14\/2\/2020 tarihinde istinaf kanu yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
8. Diyarbak\u0131r B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 8. Hukuk Dairesi (B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi) 27\/11\/2020 tarihinde i\u015fverenin istinaf ba\u015fvurusunu kabul ederek Mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131 kald\u0131rm\u0131\u015f ve davay\u0131 kesin olarak reddetmi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinin ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“Somut olayda; davac\u0131 iddias\u0131n\u0131n ispat\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan sadece tan\u0131k deliline dayanm\u0131\u015f olup, UYAP sisteminde yap\u0131lan incelemede davac\u0131 taraf\u00e7a dinletilen tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n i\u015fverene kar\u015f\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu davas\u0131 bulundu\u011fu,husumetli oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Daval\u0131 i\u015fveren ise tan\u0131k dinletmemi\u015ftir.Dosyada davac\u0131n\u0131n ulusal bayram ve genel tatil g\u00fcnlerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair i\u015fverenle ihtilaf i\u00e7inde olan butan\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda da ba\u015fkaca delil bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Davac\u0131 taraf\u00e7a mail \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131lar\u0131 dosya aras\u0131na konulmu\u015f ise de bu maillerin daval\u0131 taraf\u00e7a g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi de ispatlanamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yan delillerle desteklenmedik\u00e7e husumetli tan\u0131k beyan\u0131 ile sonuca gidilmesi hatal\u0131d\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay Hukuk Genel Kurulunun 29\/06\/2016 g\u00fcn, 2015\/22-1444 Esas, 2016\/869 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131 ve Yarg\u0131tay 22. Hukuk Dairesinin 21\/10\/2019 g\u00fcn 2017\/10506 Esas-2019\/19486 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131 da bu do\u011frultudad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Sonu\u00e7 itibar\u0131yla davac\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n somut davada \u00e7\u0131kacak sonu\u00e7tan menfaat elde edece\u011fi tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131z oldu\u011fundan ba\u015fka delillerle desteklenmeden tek ba\u015f\u0131na husumetli tan\u0131k anlat\u0131m\u0131na dayanarak yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup, ulusal bayram ve genel tatil alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi gerekirken kabul\u00fc y\u00f6n\u00fcnden h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 hatal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu y\u00f6ne ili\u015fkin daval\u0131 vekilinin istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun kabul\u00fc gerekmi\u015ftir.”<\/p>\n
9. Nihai karar ba\u015fvurucuya 22\/12\/2020 tarihinde tebli\u011f edilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu 8\/1\/2021 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan, elektronik posta konusunda daha fazla ara\u015ft\u0131rma yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ve bu ara\u015ft\u0131rma neticesinde davas\u0131nda hakl\u0131 oldu\u011funun anla\u015f\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Zira elektronik postalar\u0131 baz\u0131 zamanlar kendi \u015fahsi posta adresinden \u015firket yetkililerine g\u00f6revi gere\u011fi g\u00f6nderdi\u011fi, posta i\u00e7eriklerine hi\u00e7bir zaman daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan itiraz edilmedi\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir. \u015eirkette kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 bilgisayar hard diskinin veya log kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n sunulmas\u0131 istenilmesine ra\u011fmen daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan sunulmamas\u0131ndan \u015fikayet edilmi\u015ftir. Tan\u0131k olarak g\u00f6sterilen ki\u015finin i\u015fveren ile husumetli oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7e g\u00f6sterilerek kabul edilmemesinin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu zira i\u015f yerinden ayr\u0131lan ki\u015filerin tan\u0131k olarak g\u00f6sterilmesinde herhangi bir engel bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia edilerek adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
11. Anayasa Mahkemesi, olaylar\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan hukuki nitelendirmesi ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmay\u0131p olay ve olgular\u0131n hukuki tavsifini kendisi takdir eder. Ba\u015fvurucunun iddialar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmesi gerekti\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. A\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilmesini gerektirecek ba\u015fka bir neden de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
13. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 g\u00fcvencesini de kapsamaktad\u0131r (daha geni\u015f de\u011ferlendirme i\u00e7in bkz. Abdullah Top\u00e7u [1. B.], B. No: 2014\/8868, 19\/4\/2017, \u00a7 75). Nitekim Anayasa’n\u0131n 141. maddesinin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131nda \u201cB\u00fct\u00fcn mahkemelerin her t\u00fcrl\u00fc kararlar\u0131 gerek\u00e7eli olarak yaz\u0131l\u0131r.\u201d denilerek mahkemelere kararlar\u0131n\u0131 gerek\u00e7eli yazma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc y\u00fcklenmi\u015ftir. Mahkemelerin an\u0131lan y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, yarg\u0131lamada ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen her t\u00fcrl\u00fc iddia ve savunmaya karar gerek\u00e7esinde ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 yan\u0131t vermesi gerekti\u011fi \u015feklinde anla\u015f\u0131lamaz. Ancak mahkemeler, kendilerine sunulan t\u00fcm iddialara yan\u0131t vermek zorunda de\u011filse de (Yasemin Ek\u015fi [1. B.], B. No: 2013\/5486, 4\/12\/2013, \u00a7 56) mahkemelerin davan\u0131n esas sorunlar\u0131n\u0131 inceledikleri gerek\u00e7eli karardan anla\u015f\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Bir kararda tam olarak hangi unsurlar\u0131n bulunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi davan\u0131n niteli\u011fine ve \u015fartlar\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. Muhakeme s\u0131ras\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k ve somut bir bi\u00e7imde \u00f6ne s\u00fcr\u00fclen iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n davan\u0131n sonucuna etkili, ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle davan\u0131n sonucunu de\u011fi\u015ftirebilecek nitelikte olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde davayla do\u011frudan ilgili olan bu hususlara mahkemelerce makul bir gerek\u00e7e ile yan\u0131t verilmesi gerekir (Sencer Ba\u015fat ve di\u011ferleri [GK], B. No: 2013\/7800, 18\/6\/2014, \u00a7 35). Aksi bir tutumla mahkemenin davan\u0131n sonucuna etkili oldu\u011funu kabul etti\u011fi bir husus hakk\u0131nda ilgili ve yeterli bir yan\u0131t vermemesi veya yan\u0131t vermeyi gerektiren usul veya esasa dair iddialar\u0131 cevaps\u0131z b\u0131rakmas\u0131 hak ihlaline neden olabilecektir (Sencer Ba\u015fat ve di\u011ferleri, \u00a7 39).<\/p>\n
14. Ba\u015fvurucu i\u015f akdini tek tarafl\u0131 olarak feshettikten sonra i\u015f\u00e7i alacaklar\u0131n\u0131n tahsili amac\u0131yla dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkeme davay\u0131 k\u0131smen kabul ederek ba\u015fvurucunun k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131 ile ulusal bayram genel tatil \u00fccret alaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 hak etti\u011fi sonucuna varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi ise davay\u0131 reddetmi\u015ftir. Kararda, i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen elektronik postalar\u0131n i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6nderildi\u011finin kan\u0131tlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Tan\u0131k olarak g\u00f6sterilen ki\u015finin i\u015fverene kar\u015f\u0131 dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle i\u015fveren ile aras\u0131nda husumet bulundu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir. Yan delille desteklenmeyen tan\u0131k delili ile sonuca gidilemeyece\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
15. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi, ba\u015fvurucunun tan\u0131k olarak g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi ki\u015finin ayn\u0131 i\u015fverene dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle i\u015fveren ile aras\u0131nda husumet bulundu\u011funu de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131lan davada elde edilecek sonu\u00e7tan tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n menfaat elde edecek olmas\u0131 ve yan delil ile tan\u0131k delilin desteklenmemesi nedeniyle davan\u0131n k\u0131smen de olsa kabul\u00fc y\u00f6n\u00fcnde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131n\u0131 hatal\u0131 bulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
16. Tan\u0131k olarak g\u00f6sterilen ki\u015fi ile ba\u015fvurucunun ayn\u0131 i\u015fverene dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 tan\u0131k delilinin g\u00fcvenilirli\u011fini tek ba\u015f\u0131na ortadan kald\u0131rmayacakt\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun i\u015f yerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan bir ki\u015fiden ba\u015fka birini tan\u0131k olarak g\u00f6stermesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan da herhangi bir tan\u0131k g\u00f6sterilmemi\u015ftir. Bu durumda tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n dile getirdi\u011fi hususlar\u0131n B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan de\u011ferlendirilmesinde herhangi bir engel yoktur. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi dile getirilen hususlar\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmeli ve kabul edilebilir olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koymal\u0131d\u0131r. Somut olayda B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi ise tan\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan i\u015fverene dava a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n belirtti\u011fi hususlar\u0131 hi\u00e7bir \u015fekilde irdelememi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
17. \u00d6te yandan B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen elektronik postalar\u0131n i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6nderildi\u011finin ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etmi\u015ftir. Elektronik postan\u0131n kim taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi elektronik posta \u00fczerinde yap\u0131lacak inceleme neticesinde anla\u015f\u0131labilir. Mahkeme de bu konuda bilirki\u015fi incelemesi yapt\u0131rm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Konuya ili\u015fkin d\u00fczenlenen raporda, ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fahsi elektronik posta adresi \u00fczerinden baz\u0131 hesap raporlar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6nderildi\u011finin tespit edildi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ancak konun daha iyi anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurucunun \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcre zarf\u0131nda kullanm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu bilgisayarlara ait hard diskler, i\u00e7 a\u011f sistemi ve log kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n daval\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan temin edilmesi gerekti\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir (bkz. \u00a7 4). Raporda belirtilen hususlara dair yap\u0131lacak inceleme sonucunda elde edilen veriler de\u011ferlendirilerek karar sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lma nedeni, ilgili ve yeterli bir gerek\u00e7e ile ortaya konulmal\u0131d\u0131r. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi ise bu y\u00f6nde bir de\u011ferlendirme yapmaks\u0131z\u0131n sonuca varm\u0131\u015f, neden i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan elektronik postalar\u0131n g\u00f6nderilmedi\u011finin tespit edildi\u011fini karar\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131klamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu itibarla yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcreci bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde ba\u015fvurucunun gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
18. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
19. Ba\u015fvurucu m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131n da ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015fse de gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verildi\u011finden m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine y\u00f6nelik iddia hakk\u0131nda kabul edilebilirlik ve esas y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ayr\u0131ca bir inceleme yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n gerek olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/p>\n
20. Ba\u015fvurucu, ihlalin tespiti ile 30.000 TL manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
21. Ba\u015fvuruda tespit edilen hak ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar ve zorunluluk bulunmaktad\u0131r. Anayasa’n\u0131n 148. ve 153. maddeleri ile 30\/3\/2011 tarihli ve 6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin Kurulu\u015fu ve Yarg\u0131lama Usulleri Hakk\u0131nda Kanun’un 50. ve 66. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca ihlal karar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi yarg\u0131 mercilerinin yapmas\u0131 gereken i\u015f, yeniden yarg\u0131lama i\u015flemlerini ba\u015flat\u0131p Anayasa Mahkemesinin ihlal karar\u0131nda belirtilen ilkelere ve gerek\u00e7elere uygun bi\u00e7imde y\u00fcr\u00fctecekleri yarg\u0131lama sonunda hak ihlalinin nedenlerini gidererek yeni bir karar vermektir (yeniden yarg\u0131lama konusunda bkz. Mehmet Do\u011fan [GK], B. No: 2014\/8875, 7\/6\/2018, \u00a7\u00a7 54-60; Alig\u00fcl Alkaya ve di\u011ferleri (2), B. No: 2016\/12506, 7\/11\/2019, \u00a7\u00a7 53-60, 66; Kadri Enis Berbero\u011flu (3) [GK], B. No: 2020\/32949, 21\/1\/2021, \u00a7\u00a7 93-100).<\/p>\n
22. \u00d6te yandan hak ihlali karar\u0131ndan Anayasa Mahkemesinin davan\u0131n sonucuyla ilgili olarak bir tutum sergiledi\u011fi sonucu \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmamal\u0131d\u0131r. Anayasa Mahkemesince verilen hak ihlali karar\u0131 uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n sonu\u00e7lar\u0131ndan ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z olup davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne, reddine ya da beraate veya mahk\u00fbmiyete karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi anlam\u0131na gelmemektedir. Kural olarak, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n her a\u015famas\u0131nda oldu\u011fu gibi ihlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 gidermek \u00fczere yeniden yap\u0131lacak yarg\u0131lama sonunda da delillerin dava ile ili\u015fkisini kurma ve bunlar\u0131 de\u011ferlendirip sonu\u00e7 \u00e7\u0131karma yetkisi ilgili mahkemelere aittir.<\/p>\n
23. \u0130hlalin ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n yeterli bir giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Di\u011fer ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n \u0130NCELENMES\u0130NE GEREK OLMADI\u011eINA,<\/p>\n
D. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere \u0130zmir Diyarbak\u0131r B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 8. Hukuk Dairesine (E.2020\/696, K.2020\/1033) iletilmek \u00fczere Diyarbak\u0131r 4. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesine (E.2018\/404, K.2019\/643) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. Ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat talebinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. 487,60 TL har\u00e7 ve 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 30.487,60 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
G. \u00d6demelerin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucunun Hazine ve Maliye Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren d\u00f6rt ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u00f6demede gecikme olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu s\u00fcrenin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6deme tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in yasal FA\u0130Z UYGULANMASINA,<\/p>\n
H. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 4\/2\/2025 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 4\/2\/2025 tarihli ve 2021\/3130 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 karar\u0131\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130 ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 CAFER ORU\u00c7 BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/3130) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 4\/2\/2025 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU \u00a0 \u00a0 Metin KIRATLI Raport\u00f6r : Eren Can BENAKAY Ba\u015fvurucu : Cafer ORU\u00c7 Vekili : Av. Muhammet Polat \u0130\u00c7TEN \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, i\u015f\u00e7i alacaklar\u0131n\u0131n tahsili amac\u0131yla a\u00e7\u0131lan davada, davan\u0131n sonucuna etkili iddialar\u0131n kararda kar\u015f\u0131lanmamas\u0131 nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ba\u015fvurucu 27\/9\/2014 ile 12\/1\/2018 tarihleri aras\u0131nda \u00f6n muhasebe g\u00f6revlisi olarak asgari \u00fccret kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu i\u015f akdini tek tarafl\u0131 olarak feshettikten sonra dini bayramlar\u0131n birinci g\u00fcn\u00fc ve arefe g\u00fcnleri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda t\u00fcm tatil g\u00fcnlerinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma ve di\u011fer \u00fccretlerinin \u00f6denmemi\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeni ile i\u015fi b\u0131rakt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ancak psikolojik bask\u0131 nedeni ile istifa dilek\u00e7esi vermek zorunda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131, fazla mesai alaca\u011f\u0131 ve ulusal bayram genel tatil alaca\u011f\u0131na karar verilmesi amac\u0131yla 30\/7\/2018 tarihinde dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 3. Ba\u015fvurucu dava dilek\u00e7esinde, haftan\u0131n alt\u0131 g\u00fcn\u00fc, ulusal bayram ve genel tatillerde, dini bayramlarda ise arefe ve bayram\u0131n birinci g\u00fcn\u00fc hari\u00e7 \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. \u015eirket i\u00e7i elektronik postalar\u0131n \u015fahsi hesab\u0131 \u00fczerinden at\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, elektronik postalar incelendi\u011finde hangi g\u00fcnler ne …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-71250","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n