September 2026 – On 21 September 2026, the Turkish Constitutional Court (“ConstitutionalCourt”) published in the Official Gazette (No. 33377) its decision dated 3 March 2026 on in respect of an individual application (Application No. 2022/82055) (the "Decision").
The Constitutional Court held that a regional court of appeal violated the applicant’s right of access to court by adopting an overly formalistic approach. The regional court had dismissed a reinstatement claim on the ground that the mandatory mediation requirement had not been fulfilled, as the reinstatement claim had not been selected on the mediation application form. The Constitutional Court, however, found that this approach was unjustified, noting that the final mediation minutes expressly referred to the reinstatement claim.
Below you can find our summary of the Decision.
Under Article 3 of the Labour Courts Law No. 7036, applying to a mediator is a mandatory precondition for filing (i) claims for employee or employer receivables and compensation and (ii) reinstatement claims. If a lawsuit is filed without first completing the mandatory mediation process, the court must dismiss it on procedural grounds without examining the merits.
In order to initiate a mediation process, the applicant must complete an application form. Such forms were introduced by the Mediation Regulation published on 2 June 2018. For applications filed after that date, the Court of Cassation has consistently held that the mandatory mediation requirement is not satisfied where the final mediation minutes do not clearly specify which receivables or compensation items were, or were not, subject to mediation. In practice, some courts of appeal therefore relied mainly on the items indicated on the mediation application form when deciding whether a reinstatement claim had been subject to mediation.
In the case at hand, an employee of a subcontractor filed a reinstatement claim after his employment contract was terminated. The İzmir 11th Labour Court ruled in his favour. However, the İzmir Regional Court of Appeal reversed that judgment and dismissed the case on the ground that the mandatory mediation precondition had not been satisfied. It reasoned that the "reinstatement" option had not been selected on the application form.
Constitutional Court's assessment
The Constitutional Court accepted that mandatory mediation is prescribed by law and pursues a legitimate aim, namely, to facilitate the faster and more cost-effective resolution of employment disputes and to promote the parties’ equal access to the process without resorting to litigation. It then examined whether the regional court's interpretation was proportionate and highlighted the following points:
- The final mediation minutes are drawn up on the basis of the parties' statements. A signed final minute recording that the parties failed to agree on reinstatement demonstrates that the mediation precondition has been met.
- Although the reinstatement claim was not selected on the application form, the final mediation minutes in this case expressly listed reinstatement among the matters discussed during the mediation.
- The employee had also claimed non-reinstatement compensation and wages for the period of inactivity. These claims arise as financial consequences of a reinstatement claim. Accordingly, it could not be concluded that the reinstatement claim had been excluded from the scope of the mediation.
- The regional court's interpretation made it more difficult for the employee to pursue his claim, reflected an overly formalistic approach to the mediation rules, and placed a disproportionate burden on the employee.
Conclusion
The Constitutional Court unanimously found a violation of the applicant’s right of access to court under Article 36 of the Constitution. The Decision reinforces the principle that mandatory mediation requirements should not be applied in an excessively formalistic manner where such an approach would undermine an applicant’s effective access to justice.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]
