{"id":13906,"date":"2023-11-20T08:01:19","date_gmt":"2023-11-20T07:01:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/"},"modified":"2023-12-01T05:50:41","modified_gmt":"2023-12-01T04:50:41","slug":"tazminat","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/","title":{"rendered":"tazminat"},"content":{"rendered":"

[vc_row triangle_shape=”no”][vc_column][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700463804353{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]<\/p>\n

tazminat<\/h4>\n

[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700463851472{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]<\/p>\n

a) S\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131rma<\/strong><\/h6>\n

[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700463821927{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]6 Aral\u0131k 2006 tarihli bir kararla (4 AZR 659\/05), D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc Senato, toplu olarak kabul edilen bir \u00fccretlendirme grubunun belirli bir teknik standarda ili\u015fkin faaliyet \u00f6zelli\u011finin yorumlanmas\u0131n\u0131n, toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 d\u00f6nemdeki ko\u015fullara ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011funa karar vermi\u015ftir. pazarl\u0131k anla\u015fmas\u0131. Tarife standartlar\u0131, yeni teknik geli\u015fmeler nedeniyle k\u0131s\u0131tlay\u0131c\u0131 veya geni\u015fletici bir \u015fekilde yorumlanamayabilir. Teknik geli\u015fmeler nedeniyle toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme art\u0131k uygun g\u00f6r\u00fcnm\u00fcyorsa, ileri teknik geli\u015fmeyi uygun standartlar arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla dikkate almak toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin taraflar\u0131n\u0131n sorumlulu\u011fundad\u0131r. Mahkemelerin, toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin lafz\u0131 ve genel i\u00e7eri\u011fi herhangi bir toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme olana\u011f\u0131 sa\u011flamasa bile, yeni teknik geli\u015fmeler nedeniyle toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme standartlar\u0131n\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlay\u0131c\u0131 veya geni\u015fletici bir \u015fekilde yorumlamalar\u0131 durumunda, Temel Kanun taraf\u0131ndan korunan toplu pazarl\u0131k \u00f6zerkli\u011fine kabul edilemez bir \u015fekilde m\u00fcdahale etmi\u015f olacaklard\u0131r. Bu.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700463876799{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]24 Ocak 2007 (4 AZR 629\/06) tarihli karar\u0131nda, D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc Senato \u00d6zg\u00fcr Saksonya Eyaletindeki ilkokul \u00f6\u011fretmenlerinin s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 ele ald\u0131. \u00d6zg\u00fcr Devlet’in \u00f6\u011fretim y\u00f6nergelerine uygun olarak bu, devlet memurlar\u0131n\u0131n terfisine ili\u015fkin ilkelere dayanmaktad\u0131r ve di\u011fer hususlar\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra, b\u00fct\u00e7ede belirlenmi\u015f ve doldurulmas\u0131 ama\u00e7lanan bo\u015f bir pozisyonu gerektirmektedir. \u00d6\u011fretmen y\u00f6netmeli\u011fine g\u00f6re, kamu i\u015fvereni, resmi de\u011ferlendirme sonu\u00e7lar\u0131na g\u00f6re daha \u00fcst bir gruplama i\u00e7in a\u00e7\u0131lan bo\u015f kadrolar\u0131 doldurmakla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Pozisyonlar\u0131 \u00fclke \u00e7ap\u0131nda yap\u0131lan bir kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rmada en iyi puan\u0131 alan adaylarla doldurmak zorunda de\u011fildir. Personeli y\u00f6netmeye y\u00f6nelik b\u00fct\u00e7e yetkisi nedeniyle, pozisyonlar\u0131 b\u00f6lgesel e\u011fitim yetkililerine ko\u015fullu olarak tahsis edebilir ve bu pozisyonlar daha sonra ba\u015fvuru sahiplerinin kendi sorumluluk alanlar\u0131ndaki resmi de\u011ferlendirmelerinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131na ba\u011flan\u0131r. Sonu\u00e7 olarak bu, bir b\u00f6lgesel okul idaresinin b\u00f6lgesinde, ba\u015fka bir b\u00f6lgesel okul idaresinin b\u00f6lgesine g\u00f6re daha y\u00fcksek grupland\u0131rma i\u00e7in daha iyi bir de\u011ferlendirmenin gerekli oldu\u011fu anlam\u0131na gelebilir.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700463938680{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]Temel Kanun’un 33. maddesinin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca uygunluk, yetenek ve mesleki performansa g\u00f6re se\u00e7me zorunlulu\u011fu, terfi pozisyonlar\u0131n\u0131n her zaman en iyi puana sahip \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 departmana atanmas\u0131 zorunlulu\u011funu ortadan kald\u0131rmaktad\u0131r. Davac\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan, resmi de\u011ferlendirmenin hatal\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve daha iyi bir de\u011ferlendirmenin gerekli oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131yla dahi istenilen \u00fcst gruplamaya ula\u015famamaktad\u0131r. \u0130\u015f mahkemelerinin, kamu i\u015fvereninin haz\u0131rlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 resmi de\u011ferlendirmeyi kendi de\u011ferlendirmeleri ile belirli bir sonu\u00e7la de\u011fi\u015ftirmesi esas olarak yasakt\u0131r. De\u011ferlendirme yanl\u0131\u015fsa, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n genellikle yaln\u0131zca yeni bir de\u011ferlendirmeye hakk\u0131 vard\u0131r. Raporlama d\u00f6neminde D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc Senato, 4 Ekim 2003 tarihli bina temizli\u011finde ticari \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlara y\u00f6nelik toplu i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde bir bina temizlik\u00e7isinin \u00fccret grubunda s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 sorunuyla kar\u015f\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131ya kalm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (RTV 2003). 9 May\u0131s 2007 tarihli karar\u0131nda (4 AZR 757\/06), 7 RTV 2003 maa\u015f grubunun i\u015f \u00f6zelli\u011finin bina temizleyicisi e\u011fitiminin ba\u015far\u0131yla tamamlanmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirmedi\u011fine karar vermi\u015ftir. Ancak kalfal\u0131k yap\u0131 temizlik\u00e7isi fiilen yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015f ne olursa olsun bu \u00fccret grubuna dahil edilemez.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700463961096{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]Daha ziyade, s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131rma, en az \u00fc\u00e7 y\u0131ll\u0131k mesleki e\u011fitimin gerekli oldu\u011fu faaliyetlerin a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131kl\u0131 olarak ger\u00e7ek performans\u0131n\u0131 gerektirir. Bunun i\u00e7in \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n b\u00f6yle bir faaliyeti yaln\u0131zca bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma alan\u0131nda yani bina temizli\u011fi alt alan\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmesi yeterlidir. Bina temizli\u011fi mesle\u011finin her alan\u0131nda \u201c\u00e7ok y\u00f6nl\u00fc\u201d olmalar\u0131 gerekli de\u011fildir. B\u00f6ylece Senato, bina temizli\u011fi ticaretindeki s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131rma kurallar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6nceki h\u00fck\u00fcmlere k\u0131yasla temel olarak yeniden d\u00fczenlenmesine yan\u0131t vermi\u015f oldu.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

b) Kabulde gecikme<\/h6>\n

[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464018584{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]B\u00f6l\u00fcm 615 C\u00fcmle 1 BGB’ye g\u00f6re, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan, ek \u00f6deme yapmak zorunda kalmadan, kabulde temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015fen i\u015fverenden kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan \u00fccreti talep edebilir. Ancak Alman Medeni Kanunu’nun (BGB) 615. Maddesinin 2. C\u00fcmlesine g\u00f6re, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n ba\u015fka kazan\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131n olmas\u0131 ve k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetle elde edemedi\u011fi \u015feyin de\u011ferinin dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekir. \u00c7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n, hizmetleri kabul etmekte gecikmesi olan i\u015fverenle makul bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmay\u0131 reddetmesi durumunda da kredi dikkate al\u0131nabilir. Be\u015finci Senato, 7 \u015eubat 2007 (5 AZR 422\/06) tarihli karar\u0131yla, 3 Aral\u0131k 1980 (5 AZR 477\/78) tarihli Senato karar\u0131nda ifade edilen g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ften vazge\u00e7erek, ihtilafs\u0131z i\u015f ili\u015fkisinde, i\u015fverenin \u00e7al\u0131\u015fana kar\u015f\u0131 y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckleri Ki\u015finin talimat verme hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6tesinde verilen herhangi bir i\u015f, basit\u00e7e mant\u0131ks\u0131z olarak g\u00f6r\u00fclemez. \u00a7 615 c\u00fcmle 2 BGB, mevcut i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin yerine getirilmesi amac\u0131yla s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye uygun i\u015f teklif edilmesinin kabuldeki gecikmeyi sona erdirece\u011fi i\u00e7in i\u015fverenin s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir i\u015f teklif etti\u011fi durumu i\u00e7erir.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464051304{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]Bu ilkeye g\u00f6re, ihtilafs\u0131z mevcut bir i\u015f ili\u015fkisinde (yani ihbar s\u00fcresi boyunca) makul olmama durumu, potansiyel olarak sona erdirilecek bir i\u015f ili\u015fkisinde (yani ihbar s\u00fcresi dolduktan sonra) oldu\u011fundan farkl\u0131 \u015fekilde de\u011ferlendirilemez. Ayn\u0131 \u015fekilde kanunda, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma imk\u00e2n\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6nceki i\u015fverende mi yoksa ba\u015fka bir i\u015fverende mi oldu\u011fu konusunda temel bir ayr\u0131m yap\u0131lmamaktad\u0131r. Bu nedenle burada bireysel vakan\u0131n t\u00fcm ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n da dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekir. \u0130\u015fin t\u00fcr\u00fc ve di\u011fer \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra, i\u015fverenin neden s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye uygun i\u015f teklif etmedi\u011fi ve i\u015f\u00e7inin kendisine verilen i\u015fi neden reddetti\u011fi de incelenmelidir. Be\u015finci Senato, 26 Eyl\u00fcl 2007 (5 AZR 870\/06) tarihli karar\u0131yla, kabul\u00fcn gecikmesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda ba\u015fka bir \u015feyin k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetle elde edilememesi konusundaki i\u00e7tihat\u0131n\u0131 s\u00fcrd\u00fcrd\u00fc. Bu durumda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan, KSchG’nin 2. Maddesi uyar\u0131nca fesihle ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak beyan edilen bir de\u011fi\u015fiklik teklifini \u00e7ekinceli olarak kabul etmeyerek makul \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmay\u0131 k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetle kabul etmeyebilir. Bu ayn\u0131 zamanda, s\u00f6zle\u015fmede nihai bir de\u011fi\u015fiklik yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ama\u00e7lanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, B\u00f6l\u00fcm 11 C\u00fcmle 1 No. 2 KSchG, B\u00f6l\u00fcm 615 C\u00fcmle 2 BGB uyar\u0131nca makul \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmay\u0131 kabul etme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc de tetikleyebilir. Aksine, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n B\u00f6l\u00fcm 2 KSchG’ye tabi olan ve B\u00f6l\u00fcm 8 KSchG’nin olas\u0131 sonucu olan teklifi kabul edebilmesi nedeniyle ge\u00e7ici bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma f\u0131rsat\u0131 vard\u0131r. \u0130\u015fverenin ge\u00e7ici niteli\u011fi \u00f6zel olarak ifade etmesi gerekmemektedir; kanundan kaynaklanmaktad\u0131r. \u00c7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n teklifi reddetmesi durumunda s\u00fcre\u00e7 istihdam\u0131 olarak adland\u0131r\u0131lan yeni bir teklife gerek yoktur. KSchG B\u00f6l\u00fcm 2 kapsam\u0131ndaki se\u00e7enekten yararlanmayan \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan, teklif edilen i\u015fin makul oldu\u011fu ortaya \u00e7\u0131karsa risk kendisine ait olacakt\u0131r. Bildirim de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fiyle ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fana y\u00f6nelik makul \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma f\u0131rsat\u0131, genellikle i\u015fverenin daha sonra verece\u011fi fesih bildirimiyle sona erer. De\u011fi\u015fiklik teklifini reddeden \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan art\u0131k makul olan i\u015fi kabul etmekten \u00e7ekinmeyecektir.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

c) G\u00f6n\u00fcll\u00fcl\u00fck niteli\u011fi<\/h6>\n

[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464095784{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]Be\u015finci Senato’nun 25 Nisan 2007 tarihli karar\u0131na (5 AZR 627\/06) g\u00f6re, i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6nceden haz\u0131rlanan i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde yer alan ve ayl\u0131k performans primi \u00f6denmesini \u00f6ng\u00f6ren madde, hukuki talep ge\u00e7ersizdir. Devam eden \u00fccretlendirme durumunda yasal bir hak talebinin s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle mutabakata var\u0131larak hari\u00e7 tutulmas\u0131, iyi niyet gereklerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131 makul olmayan bir dezavantaja sokar ve B\u00f6l\u00fcm 307 Paragraf 1 C\u00fcmle 1 BGB uyar\u0131nca etkisizdir. Ge\u00e7mi\u015fte, Federal \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi yaln\u0131zca \u00f6zel \u00fccretler (Noel ikramiyeleri ve bah\u015fi\u015fler gibi) ile ilgili olarak s\u00f6zde g\u00f6n\u00fcll\u00fc \u00e7ekincelerin etkinli\u011fini kabul ediyordu. Mevcut \u00fccretlerin etkilenmesi durumunda, yasal taleplerin hari\u00e7 tutulmas\u0131, iptal \u00e7ekincesi olarak yorumland\u0131. Ancak BGB Madde 308 No. 4’\u00fcn y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girmesinden sonra bu art\u0131k m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Ge\u00e7ersiz \u015fart\u0131n ge\u00e7erlili\u011fini yitirmesi durumunda yap\u0131lacak ek s\u00f6zle\u015fme yorumu, taraflar\u0131n, h\u00fckm\u00fcn etkisiz oldu\u011funu bilselerdi ve menfaatleri do\u011fru \u015fekilde tart\u0131lsalard\u0131 hangi d\u00fczenlemeyi yapacaklar\u0131n\u0131n belirlenebilmesini gerektirmektedir. \u0130\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan bir \u00f6demenin, herhangi bir ek bilgi olmaks\u0131z\u0131n, sadece performans ikramiyesi olarak tan\u0131mlanmas\u0131 halinde, bu, B\u00f6l\u00fcm 308 No. 4 BGB anlam\u0131nda iptal nedenleri hakk\u0131nda yeterli sonu\u00e7lara var\u0131lmas\u0131na izin vermez. Bu durumda, sakl\u0131 tutulan de\u011fi\u015fikliklerin gereklilikleri ve kapsam\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmede belirtilmez.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

d) E\u015fit muamele ilkesi<\/h6>\n

[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464137112{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]Be\u015finci Senato’nun 14 Mart 2007 tarihli karar\u0131na (5 AZR 420\/06) g\u00f6re, i\u015fverenin \u00e7ekirdek i\u015fg\u00fcc\u00fcne yaln\u0131zca bir i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi uyar\u0131nca maa\u015f art\u0131\u015f\u0131 vermesi halinde e\u015fit muamele genel ilkesi ge\u00e7erlidir. BetrVG Madde 77 (3)’\u00fc ihlal etti\u011finin fark\u0131ndad\u0131r ancak i\u015f devri sonucunda i\u015fe al\u0131nan \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar i\u00e7in ge\u00e7erli de\u011fildir. Bu durum, farkl\u0131 \u00fccretlendirme sistemlerinin, i\u015fverenin grup olu\u015fturmas\u0131na de\u011fil, Alman Medeni Kanunu’nun 613a maddesi 1. f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n 1. ve 2. c\u00fcmlelerindeki h\u00fck\u00fcmlere dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 ger\u00e7e\u011fiyle \u00e7eli\u015fmemektedir. Yard\u0131mlar\u0131n sa\u011flanmas\u0131nda bunun \u00fczerine in\u015fa edilmesi ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z bir grup olu\u015fumunu temsil eder Bir yanda kal\u0131c\u0131 i\u015fg\u00fcc\u00fc ile di\u011fer yanda transfer edilen \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar aras\u0131ndaki farkl\u0131 i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri ve \u00fccret sistemleri, maa\u015f art\u0131\u015flar\u0131 s\u00f6z konusu oldu\u011funda farkl\u0131 muameleyi hakl\u0131 \u00e7\u0131karmaz. Farkl\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme modellerinin ge\u00e7erlili\u011fi resmi bir de\u011ferlendirmedir ve farkl\u0131la\u015fman\u0131n nesnel nedeninin yerine ge\u00e7mez. Grup olu\u015fumu ancak ayr\u0131m\u0131n me\u015fru bir amaca hizmet etmesi ve bu amaca ula\u015fmak i\u00e7in gerekli ve uygun olmas\u0131 durumunda hakl\u0131 g\u00f6sterilebilir.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464150415{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]Farkl\u0131la\u015fman\u0131n nesnel bir nedeni \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n uyumla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131nda yatabilir. Dezavantajlar\u0131 telafi ederek ve bunlar\u0131 transfer edilen i\u015fg\u00fcc\u00fcn\u00fcn ko\u015fullar\u0131yla uyumlu hale getirerek tek tip \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n yarat\u0131lmas\u0131, farkl\u0131 gruplara farkl\u0131 muamele edilmesini hakl\u0131 k\u0131lar. Bu, \u00fccret art\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcm \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131 etkileyen parasal deval\u00fcasyonun telafisini temsil etti\u011fi ger\u00e7e\u011fiyle \u00e7eli\u015fmiyor. Farkl\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rmay\u0131 gerektiren nesnel nedenlerin bulunmas\u0131 durumunda, enflasyona ba\u011fl\u0131 fiyat art\u0131\u015flar\u0131na ili\u015fkin tazminat\u0131n t\u00fcm \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlara e\u015fit olarak verilmesi zorunlu de\u011fildir.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

e) \u00d6zel \u00f6deme<\/h6>\n

[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464187480{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]Onuncu Senato, 25 Nisan 2007 (10 AZR 634\/06) tarihli karar\u0131nda, bireysel s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerde mutabakata var\u0131lan geri \u00f6deme h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin i\u00e7eri\u011finin kontrol\u00fcn\u00fc ele ald\u0131. Taraflar, di\u011fer hususlar\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n sosyal yard\u0131m (TV yard\u0131m\u0131) alma hakk\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fczenleyen bir toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin ge\u00e7erli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusunda bir i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi bi\u00e7iminde anla\u015fmaya var\u0131rsa, ancak i\u015fveren yine de \u00e7al\u0131\u015fana “tarife d\u0131\u015f\u0131 bir yard\u0131m” \u00f6derse bu toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme uyar\u0131nca”. TV hibesi, sonraki y\u0131llarda hibeye y\u00f6nelik herhangi bir talep do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131 dikkate al\u0131narak s\u00f6zle\u015fmede an\u0131lmamaktad\u0131r.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464202319{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]B\u00f6yle bir durumda i\u015fveren, hibe \u00f6demesini TV hibesinin geri \u00f6deme ko\u015fullar\u0131na ba\u011flarsa, geri \u00f6deme maddesi, toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler ile kanuni h\u00fck\u00fcmler anlam\u0131nda e\u015fit olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen, 307. madde uyar\u0131nca i\u00e7erik kontrol\u00fcne tabi tutulur. B\u00f6l\u00fcm 307 Paragraf 3 BGB, B\u00f6l\u00fcm 310 Paragraf 4 C\u00fcmle 3 BGB Paragraf 1 BGB’de \u015fart ko\u015fulmu\u015ftur. Burada belirleyici olan, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n haklar\u0131n\u0131n tamamen ve s\u00fcrekli olarak TV \u00f6dene\u011fine dayand\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131d\u0131r. \u00d6zel \u00f6demelerle ilgili bireysel s\u00f6zle\u015fme ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve geri \u00f6deme h\u00fck\u00fcmleri, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n mesleki \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc izin verilemez \u015fekilde engellememelidir ve bu nedenle Alman Medeni Kanunu’nun (BGB) 307. Maddesi uyar\u0131nca i\u00e7erik kontrol\u00fcne tabidir.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464293735{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]Y\u0131l sonunda \u00f6denen y\u00fcz avronun \u00fczerinde ancak bir ayl\u0131k maa\u015f\u0131n alt\u0131nda kalan bir ikramiye, bireysel s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye dayal\u0131 geri \u00f6deme maddesinin bir par\u00e7as\u0131 olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131 yaln\u0131zca bir sonraki y\u0131l\u0131n 31 Mart tarihine kadar ba\u011flayabilir. Daha fazla taahh\u00fct, B\u00f6l\u00fcm 307 Paragraf 1 C\u00fcmle 1 BGB uyar\u0131nca etkisizdir ve bu nedenle i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan geri \u00f6deme talebinde bulunulmas\u0131na yol a\u00e7maz. Onuncu Senato’nun 24 Ekim 2007 tarihli karar\u0131na g\u00f6re, i\u015fverenlerin \u00f6nceden haz\u0131rlanm\u0131\u015f i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleri, Alman Medeni Kanunu’nun 307. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n 2. c\u00fcmlesinde yer alan \u015feffafl\u0131k \u015fart\u0131n\u0131 ihlal etmektedir ve \u00e7al\u0131\u015fana makul olmayan bir \u015fekilde zarar verecek \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde etkisizdir. iyi niyetin gereklerine ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130\u015fverenin \u00f6nceden haz\u0131rlanm\u0131\u015f bir i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde i\u015f\u00e7iye ikramiye \u00f6demeyi taahh\u00fct etmesi durumunda, ikramiyenin g\u00f6n\u00fcll\u00fc olarak \u00f6dendi\u011fi ve \u00f6denmesine ili\u015fkin yasal bir hakk\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fc, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131 makul olmayan bir dezavantajl\u0131 duruma sokmaktad\u0131r. Bu s\u00f6zle\u015fme maddesi nedeniyle \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n ikramiye hakk\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrememe riski bulunmaktad\u0131r. B\u00f6yle bir durumda, ikramiye d\u00fczenlemesi bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak etkisiz olmay\u0131p, yaln\u0131zca \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n ikramiye \u00f6demesine ili\u015fkin yasal bir hakk\u0131n hari\u00e7 tutulmas\u0131 nedeniyle dezavantajl\u0131 duruma d\u00fc\u015fmesi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcnde etkisiz olacakt\u0131r.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464310215{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]Kararda Senato ayr\u0131ca \u00f6zel \u00f6demelere ili\u015fkin \u00f6nceden form\u00fcle edilmi\u015f ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin (son tarih d\u00fczenlemeleri veya geri \u00f6deme h\u00fck\u00fcmleri) i\u00e7eri\u011finin kontrol\u00fcn\u00fc de ele ald\u0131. Buna g\u00f6re, i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6nceden form\u00fcle edilen ve \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n kar ve performansa ba\u011fl\u0131 ikramiye \u00f6demesi hakk\u0131n\u0131, i\u015f ili\u015fkisinin belirli bir tarihte feshedilmeksizin mevcut olmas\u0131na ba\u011flayan bir madde de Madde 1’e g\u00f6re i\u00e7erik kontrol\u00fcne tabidir. Alman Medeni Kanununun (BGB) 305 ve devam\u0131. \u0130kramiye tutar\u0131 ne olursa olsun, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131 bir sonraki y\u0131l\u0131n 30 Eyl\u00fcl tarihine kadar ba\u011flayan kesinti tarihi d\u00fczenlemesi \u00e7ok geni\u015f olup, madde anlam\u0131nda iyi niyet gereklerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131 makul olmayan bir dezavantajl\u0131 duruma sokmaktad\u0131r. Alman Medeni Kanununun (BGB) 307’sidir ve bu nedenle etkisizdir. Eski durumlarda, yani Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu Modernizasyon Kanunu y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girmeden \u00f6nce akdedilen s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerde, ge\u00e7ersizlik \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131yla olu\u015fan bo\u015fluk, ek s\u00f6zle\u015fme yorumu yoluyla kapat\u0131labilmektedir.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464324601{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]Taraflar, ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 \u015fart\u0131n kanunen zorunlu k\u0131l\u0131nan etkisizli\u011fini bilselerdi ne gibi bir anla\u015fmaya varacaklard\u0131 sorusunun cevab\u0131, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin belirledi\u011fi \u00e7er\u00e7eve i\u00e7erisinde aranmal\u0131d\u0131r. Ek s\u00f6zle\u015fme yorumunun sonucu, taraflar\u0131n s\u00f6zle\u015fmede ifade edilen niyetleriyle \u00e7eli\u015fmemelidir. Senato, ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin i\u00e7eri\u011fini incelerken y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fck tarihleri \u200b\u200bile geri \u00f6deme h\u00fck\u00fcmleri aras\u0131nda bir ayr\u0131m yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekip gerekmedi\u011fi, \u00f6zel \u00f6demelere ili\u015fkin ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin fesihlerin ge\u00e7erli olup olmamas\u0131na g\u00f6re farkl\u0131l\u0131k g\u00f6stermemesi durumunda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan makul olmayan bir dezavantaj olu\u015fturup olu\u015fturmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusunu a\u00e7\u0131k b\u0131rakm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n veya i\u015fverenin sorumlulu\u011fu ve \u00c7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n toplam \u00fccretinin en az y\u00fczde 25’ini olu\u015fturan \u00f6zel \u00f6demeler i\u00e7in \u00f6nemli tarihlere veya geri \u00f6deme h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine izin verilip verilmedi\u011fi.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

f) Yerel ek \u00fccret<\/h6>\n

[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464367408{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]1 Ekim 2005’ten itibaren, federal h\u00fck\u00fcmetin \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131 ve yerel i\u015fverenlerin, yeni maa\u015f gruplar\u0131ndan birine ve maa\u015f gruplar\u0131 i\u00e7inde, TV\u00f6D \u00f6deme tablosunda bir seviye. Tahsis i\u00e7in, BAT’a g\u00f6re al\u0131nan son \u00fccret esas al\u0131narak her bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan i\u00e7in kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rmal\u0131 maa\u015f ad\u0131 verilen bir maa\u015f olu\u015fturuldu. Ancak TV\u00f6D art\u0131k B\u00f6l\u00fcm 29 B\u00f6l\u00fcm B BAT uyar\u0131nca yerel ek \u00fccret gibi medeni durum ve \u00e7ocukla ilgili \u00fccret bile\u015fenlerini sa\u011flamamaktad\u0131r. Belediye i\u015fverenlerinin \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n\u0131n TV\u00f6D’ye devredilmesine ve 13 Eyl\u00fcl 2005 tarihli ge\u00e7i\u015f kanununun d\u00fczenlenmesine (TV\u00dcVKA) ili\u015fkin toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme, \u201ceski\u201d yerel ek \u00fccretin bireysel bile\u015fenlerinin ne \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde dikkate al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirlemektedir. Kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rma \u00fccretini olu\u015ftururken hesap. Ayr\u0131ca, kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rma maa\u015f\u0131 hesaplan\u0131rken, y\u00f6netime devredilecek \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n e\u015finin yerel ek veya aile eki almaya hak kazanmas\u0131 ve TV\u00f6D’ye devredilmemesi durumunda yaln\u0131zca yerel seviye 1 ekinin esas al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 da \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fcyor. 1 Ekim 2005’e kadar. Bu d\u00fczenlemenin arka plan\u0131nda, BAT kapsam\u0131nda kalan e\u015fin, transfer an\u0131ndan itibaren yerel yard\u0131m\u0131n aileyle ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131ndan prensip olarak tamamen yararlanma hakk\u0131na sahip oldu\u011fu yatmaktad\u0131r.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464392191{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]BAT’\u0131n 29. Maddesi B F\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n 5. F\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca her evli \u00e7iftin genellikle tutar\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131 yaln\u0131zca bir kez almas\u0131 gerekti\u011finden, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n devredilmesi dikkate al\u0131nmamal\u0131d\u0131r. TV\u00dcVKA y\u00f6netmeli\u011fi, devredilecek \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n e\u015finin tam zamanl\u0131 veya yar\u0131 zamanl\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131na g\u00f6re bir ayr\u0131m yapmamaktad\u0131r. Alt\u0131nc\u0131 Senato, 25 Ekim 2007 (6 AZR 95\/07) tarihli karar\u0131nda, kalan fazladan ki\u015finin e\u015fi dahi olsa, kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rma \u00fccretinin olu\u015fturulmas\u0131nda yaln\u0131zca 1. d\u00fczey yerel ek \u00fccretin esas al\u0131nmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. BAT uygulamas\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda \u0130dari \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar, yar\u0131 zamanl\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma nedeniyle yaln\u0131zca BAT B\u00f6l\u00fcm 34 uyar\u0131nca azalt\u0131lm\u0131\u015f yerel \u00f6dene\u011fi talep edebilir. Onuncu Senato, 28 Mart 2007 (10 AZR 707\/05) tarihli karar\u0131nda, bak\u0131m hizmetindeki \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n \u00fccretlendirme d\u00fczenlemelerine ili\u015fkin protokol beyannamesine g\u00f6re bak\u0131m \u00f6dene\u011finin hangi ko\u015fullar alt\u0131nda \u00f6denmesi gerekti\u011fi konusunu ele ald\u0131. Arbeiterwohlfahrt.[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464487240{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]Bu bak\u0131m \u00f6deneklerine ili\u015fkin \u00f6nceki kararlardan farkl\u0131 olarak, hem\u015fire personelinin hem temel bak\u0131m\u0131 hem de tedavi bak\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamas\u0131n\u0131n gerekli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 varsayd\u0131. \u0130ki bak\u0131mdan birinin yap\u0131lmas\u0131 yeterlidir. Bu, protokol bildiriminin yorumlanmas\u0131yla sonu\u00e7lan\u0131r. \u00d6dene\u011fin amac\u0131, belirli hasta gruplar\u0131n\u0131n belirli ko\u015fullar alt\u0131nda bak\u0131m\u0131nda hem temel hem de tedavi bak\u0131m\u0131nda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan zorluklar\u0131 telafi etmektir. \u00d6denek, bak\u0131m t\u00fcrlerinin birikmesinden kaynaklanmaz. h) Muafiyet s\u00fcresi Toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler genellikle muafiyet d\u00f6nemleri i\u00e7erir ve bu s\u00fcrelerin yerine getirilmemesi, i\u015f ili\u015fkisinden kaynaklanan hak taleplerinin kaybedilmesine yol a\u00e7ar.
\n[\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700464530512{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]13 Aral\u0131k 2007 (6 AZR 222\/07) tarihli bir kararla Alt\u0131nc\u0131 Senato, hukuki duruma ili\u015fkin mevcut de\u011ferlendirmeye g\u00f6re, bir i\u015fverenin toplu i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi hari\u00e7 tutma s\u00fcresine g\u00fcvenip g\u00fcvenemeyece\u011fi sorusunu ele ald\u0131. alacaklar\u0131n zaman\u0131nda tahsili yasal olsayd\u0131 ba\u015far\u0131 \u015fans\u0131 olmazd\u0131. Alt\u0131nc\u0131 Senato, Federal Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin Haziran ay\u0131nda verdi\u011fi bir karar olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n ge\u00e7mi\u015f y\u0131llara ait yerel \u00f6dene\u011fin \u00e7ocukla ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n ek olarak \u00f6denmesi talebiyle ilgili olarak hari\u00e7 tutma s\u00fcresine dayanman\u0131n iyi niyeti ihlal etmedi\u011fine karar verdi. \u00c7ocuk paras\u0131 taleplerine ili\u015fkin gereklilikler hakk\u0131ndaki 11 Kas\u0131m 2005 (2 BvR 167\/ 02) karar\u0131 ayn\u0131 zamanda yerel ek i\u00e7in toplu pazarl\u0131k talebinin tahsilat\u0131nda ba\u015far\u0131 ihtimalinde de bir de\u011fi\u015fiklik yaratt\u0131. \u0130\u015fverenin ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7ta benimsedi\u011fi hukuki tutum hakl\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fcnmektedir. \u00c7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n, i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131karma s\u00fcresi i\u00e7erisinde talebini basit bir talep mektubu \u015feklinde ileri s\u00fcrmesi mant\u0131ks\u0131z de\u011fildi.[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row]<\/p>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

[vc_row triangle_shape=”no”][vc_column][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700463804353{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”] tazminat [\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700463851472{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”] a) S\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131rma [\/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1700463821927{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 30px !important;}”]6 Aral\u0131k 2006 tarihli bir kararla (4 AZR 659\/05), D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc Senato, toplu olarak kabul edilen bir \u00fccretlendirme grubunun belirli bir teknik standarda ili\u015fkin faaliyet \u00f6zelli\u011finin yorumlanmas\u0131n\u0131n, toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 d\u00f6nemdeki ko\u015fullara ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011funa karar vermi\u015ftir. pazarl\u0131k anla\u015fmas\u0131. Tarife standartlar\u0131, yeni teknik geli\u015fmeler nedeniyle k\u0131s\u0131tlay\u0131c\u0131 veya geni\u015fletici bir \u015fekilde yorumlanamayabilir. Teknik geli\u015fmeler nedeniyle toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme art\u0131k uygun g\u00f6r\u00fcnm\u00fcyorsa, ileri teknik geli\u015fmeyi uygun standartlar arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla dikkate almak toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin taraflar\u0131n\u0131n sorumlulu\u011fundad\u0131r. Mahkemelerin, toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin lafz\u0131 ve genel i\u00e7eri\u011fi herhangi bir toplu…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":10692,"parent":11641,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-13906","page","type-page","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\nRechtsanwaltskanzlei in Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei f\u00fcr Arbeitsrecht, Arzthaftung, Mietrecht, Gewerbemietrecht ,Gastronomierecht, Immobilienrecht, Schadensersatz Yachtrecht\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"tr_TR\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei in Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei f\u00fcr Arbeitsrecht, Arzthaftung, Mietrecht, Gewerbemietrecht ,Gastronomierecht, Immobilienrecht, Schadensersatz Yachtrecht\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Anwalt Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/STEINWACHSRechtsanwaltskanzlei\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-12-01T04:50:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@rasteinwachs\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Tahmini okuma s\u00fcresi\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"18 dakika\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/canta-kararlari-2007\\\/tazminat\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/canta-kararlari-2007\\\/tazminat\\\/\",\"name\":\"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei in Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/canta-kararlari-2007\\\/tazminat\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/canta-kararlari-2007\\\/tazminat\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/11\\\/Bundesarbeitsgericht_Urteile_2007.webp?fit=200%2C100&quality=20&ssl=1\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-11-20T07:01:19+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-12-01T04:50:41+00:00\",\"description\":\"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei f\u00fcr Arbeitsrecht, Arzthaftung, Mietrecht, Gewerbemietrecht ,Gastronomierecht, Immobilienrecht, Schadensersatz Yachtrecht\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/canta-kararlari-2007\\\/tazminat\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"tr\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/canta-kararlari-2007\\\/tazminat\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"tr\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/canta-kararlari-2007\\\/tazminat\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/11\\\/Bundesarbeitsgericht_Urteile_2007.webp?fit=200%2C100&quality=20&ssl=1\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/11\\\/Bundesarbeitsgericht_Urteile_2007.webp?fit=200%2C100&quality=20&ssl=1\",\"width\":200,\"height\":100,\"caption\":\"Rechtliche Wirkung einer K\u00fcndigung\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/canta-kararlari-2007\\\/tazminat\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"\u0130\u015f hukuku kararlar\u0131\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u00c7anta kararlar\u0131 2007\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/arbeitsrecht-urteile\\\/bag-urteile-2007\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"tazminat\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/\",\"name\":\"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Anwalt Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck\",\"description\":\"Wir leisten mehr als Recht bietet\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"tr\"},{\"@type\":[\"Organization\",\"Place\"],\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Anwalt Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"tr\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/logo.webp?fit=174%2C76&quality=80&ssl=1\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/logo.webp?fit=174%2C76&quality=80&ssl=1\",\"width\":174,\"height\":76,\"caption\":\"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Anwalt Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/STEINWACHSRechtsanwaltskanzlei\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/rasteinwachs\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.instagram.com\\\/steinwachs_rechtsanwaelte\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/in\\\/stephan-steinwachs-7a270197\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/channel\\\/UCffmodDlQx81remXm395RWA\"],\"telephone\":[]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei in Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck","description":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei f\u00fcr Arbeitsrecht, Arzthaftung, Mietrecht, Gewerbemietrecht ,Gastronomierecht, Immobilienrecht, Schadensersatz Yachtrecht","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/","og_locale":"tr_TR","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei in Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck","og_description":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei f\u00fcr Arbeitsrecht, Arzthaftung, Mietrecht, Gewerbemietrecht ,Gastronomierecht, Immobilienrecht, Schadensersatz Yachtrecht","og_url":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/","og_site_name":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Anwalt Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/STEINWACHSRechtsanwaltskanzlei\/","article_modified_time":"2023-12-01T04:50:41+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_site":"@rasteinwachs","twitter_misc":{"Tahmini okuma s\u00fcresi":"18 dakika"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/","url":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/","name":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei in Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Bundesarbeitsgericht_Urteile_2007.webp?fit=200%2C100&quality=20&ssl=1","datePublished":"2023-11-20T07:01:19+00:00","dateModified":"2023-12-01T04:50:41+00:00","description":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei f\u00fcr Arbeitsrecht, Arzthaftung, Mietrecht, Gewerbemietrecht ,Gastronomierecht, Immobilienrecht, Schadensersatz Yachtrecht","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"tr","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"tr","@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Bundesarbeitsgericht_Urteile_2007.webp?fit=200%2C100&quality=20&ssl=1","contentUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Bundesarbeitsgericht_Urteile_2007.webp?fit=200%2C100&quality=20&ssl=1","width":200,"height":100,"caption":"Rechtliche Wirkung einer K\u00fcndigung"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/canta-kararlari-2007\/tazminat\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"\u0130\u015f hukuku kararlar\u0131","item":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u00c7anta kararlar\u0131 2007","item":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/arbeitsrecht-urteile\/bag-urteile-2007\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"tazminat"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/","name":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Anwalt Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck","description":"Wir leisten mehr als Recht bietet","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"tr"},{"@type":["Organization","Place"],"@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/#organization","name":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Anwalt Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck","url":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"tr","@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/logo.webp?fit=174%2C76&quality=80&ssl=1","contentUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/logo.webp?fit=174%2C76&quality=80&ssl=1","width":174,"height":76,"caption":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Anwalt Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/STEINWACHSRechtsanwaltskanzlei\/","https:\/\/x.com\/rasteinwachs","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/steinwachs_rechtsanwaelte\/","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/in\/stephan-steinwachs-7a270197\/","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCffmodDlQx81remXm395RWA"],"telephone":[]}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/13906","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13906"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/13906\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/11641"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10692"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13906"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}