{"id":14499,"date":"2023-11-20T08:22:28","date_gmt":"2023-11-20T07:22:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/bag-kararlari-2006\/tazminat\/"},"modified":"2023-12-04T07:59:52","modified_gmt":"2023-12-04T06:59:52","slug":"tazminat","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/bag-kararlari-2006\/tazminat\/","title":{"rendered":"tazminat"},"content":{"rendered":"

[vc_row triangle_shape=”no”][vc_column][vc_column_text]a) \u00dccret miktar\u0131<\/p>\n

26 Nisan 2006 tarihli bir kararla (- 5 AZR 549\/05 -), Be\u015finci Senato, Brandenburg’da devlet taraf\u0131ndan tan\u0131nan bir teknik okulun m\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn maa\u015f miktar\u0131n\u0131 ele ald\u0131. M\u00fcd\u00fcr, benzer kamu sekt\u00f6r\u00fc \u00f6\u011fretmenlerinin maa\u015f\u0131n\u0131n %75’inden daha az bir maa\u015f al\u0131yordu. M\u00fcd\u00fcr, benzer kamu sekt\u00f6r\u00fc \u00f6\u011fretmenlerinin maa\u015f\u0131n\u0131n %75’inden daha az bir maa\u015f al\u0131yordu. 1 BGB ge\u00e7ersizdir. Yasal bir i\u015flem B\u00f6l\u00fcm 138 Para. 1 BGB, i\u00e7erik \u00f6zeti, saik ve ama\u00e7tan da anla\u015f\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere genel niteli\u011fi itibariyle g\u00fczel ahlakla ba\u011fda\u015fm\u0131yorsa. Ahlak\u0131n izin verdi\u011fi \u015fey, hukuk sisteminin genel ba\u011flam\u0131ndan ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar. \u0130lgili standartlar Temel Kanun ve basit yasal d\u00fczenlemelerin de\u011ferlendirmelerini i\u00e7ermektedir. Be\u015finci Senato, Federal \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi’nin \u00f6nceki i\u00e7tihad\u0131n\u0131 reddederek, g\u00fczel ahlak kavram\u0131n\u0131n b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde 7. maddenin 7. f\u0131kras\u0131ndaki anayasal de\u011ferlendirmelerle belirlendi\u011fine karar verdi. 4 GG ve bu temel hakk\u0131 dolduran eyalet hukuku d\u00fczenlemeleri daha ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 olarak tan\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Madde 7 Paragrafa g\u00f6re \u00f6zel okullar i\u00e7in onay \u015fart\u0131. 4 C\u00fcmle 4 GG, yaln\u0131zca uygun okul i\u015fleyi\u015finde kamu \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131na hizmet etmekle kalmaz, ayn\u0131 zamanda \u00f6\u011fretmenlerin korunmas\u0131na da hizmet eder. Bu nedenle, Brandenburg eyaleti d\u00fczenlemelerinin, tan\u0131nm\u0131\u015f bir \u00f6zel alternatif okul sa\u011flay\u0131c\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131, \u00f6\u011fretmenlere kamu hizmetinde \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan benzer bir \u00f6\u011fretmenin maa\u015f\u0131n\u0131n en az %75’i tutar\u0131nda \u00fccret verme zorunlulu\u011fu getirmesi halinde, \u00f6zel \u00f6\u011fretmenlerin \u00fccretlendirmesinin alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 Yasal sistemin \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc istihdam edilen \u00f6\u011fretmenler de i\u015faretli okullar\u0131n yerine ge\u00e7er. B\u00f6l\u00fcm 138 Paragraf\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin hukuki sonu\u00e7lar\u0131. 1 BGB, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n B\u00f6l\u00fcm 612 Paragraf\u0131na g\u00f6re ola\u011fan \u00fccret talebidir. 2 BGB. Kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131r\u0131labilir ekonomik \u00e7evredeki ola\u011fan \u00fccret belirleyicidir. Brandenburg’daki tan\u0131nm\u0131\u015f \u00f6zel vekalet okullar\u0131ndaki \u00f6\u011fretmenler i\u00e7in bu, 15 A\u011fustos 2001 (GVBl. II s. 539) versiyonundaki 30 Haziran 1997 (GVBl. II s. 608) tarihli vekil okul onay y\u00f6netmeli\u011finin kapsam\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Be\u015finci Senato, 14 Haziran 2006 tarihli karar\u0131nda (- 5 AZR 584\/05 -), i\u015f kanunu kapsam\u0131nda e\u015fit muamele ilkelerine uygun olarak daha y\u00fcksek \u00fccret talebine karar vermi\u015ftir. \u0130\u015f hukukunda e\u015fit muamele ilkesi, hem bireysel olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlara benzer durumdaki di\u011fer \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlarla kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u00f6nemsiz dezavantajl\u0131 muamele yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131, hem de belirli bir s\u0131n\u0131ftaki \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar aras\u0131nda \u00f6nemsiz farkl\u0131la\u015fmay\u0131 yasaklamaktad\u0131r. Farkl\u0131 muamele i\u00e7in hakl\u0131 nedenler yoksa, farkl\u0131la\u015fman\u0131n bir \u00f6nemi yoktur. Be\u015finci Senato, Federal Almanya Cumhuriyeti taraf\u0131ndan desteklenen bir \u015firketin, BAT ve BAT-O’nun ge\u00e7erlili\u011fine ili\u015fkin farkl\u0131 ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 \u200b\u200bnoktalar\u0131 da dahil olmak \u00fczere, kamu hizmeti toplu i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi kanununu uygulamas\u0131n\u0131n i\u015f hukuku kapsam\u0131nda e\u015fit muamele ilkesine uygun oldu\u011funu de\u011ferlendirdi. kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme. Toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme alanlar\u0131ndaki farkl\u0131l\u0131klar ve mevcut stat\u00fckonun korunmas\u0131 nedeniyle i\u015f ili\u015fkisinin kuruldu\u011fu yerden ba\u015flamak ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 \u200b\u200bnoktas\u0131 olarak hakl\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. \u00c7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n bu t\u00fcr bir \u00fccretlendirme sisteminin \u015feffaf olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve tutarl\u0131 bir \u015fekilde uygulanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etmesi, e\u015fit muamele ilkesinin ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin kesin bir iddia te\u015fkil etmez. Kararda Be\u015finci Senato ayr\u0131ca, nesnel olarak gerek\u00e7elendirilmeyen bir grup olu\u015fumu durumunda, yararlanan \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6receli olarak \u00e7ok az olmas\u0131 halinde, hak sahibi olmayan bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n e\u015fit muamele ilkesinden herhangi bir talepte bulunamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtti. etkilenen \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n toplam say\u0131s\u0131na g\u00f6re. Bu, daha iyi durumdaki \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n y\u00fczdesinden daha az\u0131 i\u00e7in varsay\u0131labilir. Bu ilke yaln\u0131zca i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan sa\u011flanan g\u00f6n\u00fcll\u00fc hizmetler i\u00e7in de\u011fil, ayn\u0131 zamanda i\u015f kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fccret s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi i\u00e7in de ge\u00e7erlidir.<\/p>\n

Alt\u0131nc\u0131 Senato’nun 26 Ekim 2006 tarihli karar\u0131na g\u00f6re (- 6 AZR 307\/06 -), BAT-KF’ye g\u00f6re yerel \u00f6dene\u011fin medeni duruma ba\u011fl\u0131 kademeli sistemi, yasal d\u00fczenlemenin getirilmesi nedeniyle daha sonra tamamlanamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Medeni birliktelik kurumu ve aile hukuku yap\u0131s\u0131 Medeni Birliktelik Yasas\u0131 arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla. Senato’nun 29 Nisan 2004 tarihli (- 6 AZR 101\/03 -) karar\u0131n\u0131n aksine, bu kararda toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme taraflar\u0131n\u0131n federal \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin (BAT) uygulama kapsam\u0131na ili\u015fkin varsay\u0131lan iradelerine ili\u015fkin yeterli g\u00f6stergeler varsay\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. , sonu\u00e7ta ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan toplu pazarl\u0131k bo\u015flu\u011fu, evli \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlara uygulanacak d\u00fczenlemeyi sonu\u00e7land\u0131rmak i\u00e7in Senato’nun, sorumlu Renanya-Vestfalya-Lippian \u0130\u015f Hukuku Komisyonu’nun \u00f6nceki ger\u00e7eklere dayanarak b\u00f6yle bir varsay\u0131lan iradesini kabul edememesinden kaynaklan\u0131yordu. bulgular. Eyalet \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi \u015fimdi, BAT-KF’nin uygulama kapsam\u0131na dahil olan t\u00fcm Protestan kiliselerinin, kay\u0131tl\u0131 bir hemcins birlikteli\u011fi i\u00e7inde ya\u015fayan \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlara kilise sekt\u00f6r\u00fcnde farkl\u0131 muamele edilmemesi gerekti\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde oybirli\u011fiyle kabul edilen g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131\u011fa kavu\u015fturmak zorunda kalacak. devlet \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131.<\/p>\n

b) Net tazminat\u0131n hesaplanmas\u0131<\/p>\n

\u0130\u015f kanunu uyar\u0131nca, i\u015fverenin maa\u015fla ilgili net faydalar\u0131 hesaplamak i\u00e7in bordro vergi kart\u0131nda girilen \u00f6zellikleri, \u00f6zellikle de bordro vergi s\u0131n\u0131f\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fczenli olarak kullanmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Ancak Federal \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi’nin yerle\u015fik i\u00e7tihad\u0131na g\u00f6re i\u015fveren, net maa\u015fa g\u00f6re \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fclen bir fayday\u0131 hesaplarken vergi kanununun izin verdi\u011fi her vergi s\u0131n\u0131f\u0131 se\u00e7imini dikkate almak zorunda de\u011fildir. \u00c7al\u0131\u015fana kar\u015f\u0131 kanunun k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 itiraz\u0131n\u0131 (\u00a7 242 BGB) ileri s\u00fcrebilir. \u00d6zellikle “net \u00fccret” de\u011ferlendirme esas\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n lehine ve dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131lmaz olarak i\u015fverenin zarar\u0131na kayd\u0131ran \u00fccret vergisi s\u0131n\u0131f\u0131ndaki de\u011fi\u015fiklik, d\u00fczenli olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n daha y\u00fcksek hak kazan\u0131p kazanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesine yol a\u00e7maktad\u0131r. iyi niyeti ihlal edecek \u015fekilde. Bu, i\u015fverenin \u00fczerindeki ek mali y\u00fck\u00fcn yan\u0131 s\u0131ra, kanunun d\u00fcr\u00fcst olmayan bir \u015fekilde uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131 karakterize eden di\u011fer ko\u015fullar\u0131n da varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 gerektirir. 13 Haziran 2006 tarihli bir kararla (- 9 AZR 423\/05 -), Dokuzuncu Senato, k\u0131smi emeklilik s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde ek yard\u0131mlar i\u00e7in asgari net tutar\u0131n hesaplanmas\u0131na, gelir vergisi se\u00e7iminin yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. IV\/IV s\u0131n\u0131f birle\u015fimine, e\u015flerden birinin br\u00fct maa\u015f\u0131 di\u011fer e\u015fin br\u00fct maa\u015f\u0131ndan \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde y\u00fcksek olsa bile istismar nedeniyle itiraz edilemez. Bu durum, her ikisinin de vergi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan avantajl\u0131 III\/V kombinasyonunu uzun y\u0131llar boyunca se\u00e7mi\u015f olmas\u0131 durumunda da ge\u00e7erlidir. Bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n en az\u0131ndan br\u00fct gelirine kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k gelen orant\u0131l\u0131 bir maa\u015f alma karar\u0131, e\u015flerin toplam geliri a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan vergi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan optimal olmasa bile, i\u015fveren a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan bu yasan\u0131n k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 de\u011fildir. Gelir vergisi s\u0131n\u0131f\u0131n\u0131 se\u00e7erken \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n kendisi i\u00e7in daha uygun olan temel ve standart vergiyi se\u00e7me hakk\u0131 vard\u0131r. \u0130\u015fveren korumas\u0131z de\u011fildir. Maa\u015fla ilgili net faydalar\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmesi i\u00e7in vergi s\u0131n\u0131f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak belirlemekte \u00f6zg\u00fcrd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n

c) S\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131rma<\/p>\n

Onuncu Senato, toplu \u00fccret s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin \u00fccret grubundaki bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve buna g\u00f6re \u00e7al\u0131\u015fanlar\u0131n genel faaliyetlerine g\u00f6re grupland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermek zorundayd\u0131. Onuncu Senato, 8 Mart 2006 (- 10 AZR 129\/05 -) tarihli karar\u0131nda, bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n, i\u015fverenin talimat vermedi\u011fi faaliyetleri ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirerek, s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131rmas\u0131na esas olan genel faaliyetini tek tarafl\u0131 olarak de\u011fi\u015ftiremeyece\u011fine karar vermi\u015ftir. Y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a veya z\u0131mnen onaylanmayan ve kendi y\u00f6nlendirme hakk\u0131 nedeniyle s\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle belirlenen s\u0131n\u0131rlar dahilinde i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi yapmas\u0131. Bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n daha y\u00fcksek bir \u00fccret grubuna g\u00f6re \u00fccret talebinde bulunmas\u0131 halinde, bu nedenle, yaln\u0131zca tespit niteli\u011finde bir s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131rma davas\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda fiilen y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fc\u011f\u00fc faaliyetleri a\u00e7\u0131klamakla kalmamal\u0131, ayn\u0131 zamanda i\u015fverenin kendisine daha y\u00fcksek de\u011feri ne zaman ve ne \u015fekilde tahsis etti\u011fini de belirtmelidir. g\u00f6revler. Onuncu Senato, bir \u00fccret grubunun i\u015f \u00f6zelliklerinin, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n bir \u00f6deme grubunun referans \u00f6rne\u011finde listelenen t\u00fcm faaliyetleri yaln\u0131zca ge\u00e7ici olarak yerine getirmemesi durumunda yerine getirilmi\u015f say\u0131laca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6ng\u00f6ren \u00f6nceki i\u00e7tihad\u0131n\u0131 onaylam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu, toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme taraflar\u0131n\u0131n, hukuki se\u00e7enekleri kapsam\u0131nda, s\u0131k s\u0131k meydana gelen tipik g\u00f6revleri belirli bir \u00fccret grubuna devredebilecekleri ger\u00e7e\u011fine dayanmaktad\u0131r. K\u0131lavuz, kural veya faaliyet \u00f6rnekleri, toplu pazarl\u0131k sisteminde s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131rma a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ancak belirli bir \u00fccret grubunda \u00f6rnek olarak yaln\u0131zca bir kez g\u00f6r\u00fcnd\u00fckleri takdirde bu \u00f6neme sahiptir.<\/p>\n

A\u015fa\u011f\u0131 Saksonya’da 9 Haziran 2000 tarihli toptan sat\u0131\u015f ve d\u0131\u015f ticarete ili\u015fkin toplu \u00fccret s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde (LTV Toptan Sat\u0131\u015f) bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n bir \u00fccret grubuna s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 sorunu, karar i\u00e7in D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc Senato’nun \u00f6n\u00fcndeydi. \u00c7al\u0131\u015fan, i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan i\u015fletilen bir depoda depo i\u015f\u00e7isi olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. \u0130\u015fveren, kendi ad\u0131 alt\u0131nda i\u015fletilen, her t\u00fcrl\u00fc \u00f6zel ve kalan \u00fcr\u00fcnleri sunan bir ma\u011fazalar zinciri olu\u015fturmak i\u00e7in bir konsept geli\u015ftirdi. Di\u011fer giri\u015fimcilerle, ba\u015fkalar\u0131 ad\u0131na m\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fcn kendi ad\u0131 alt\u0131nda olu\u015fturdu\u011fu bir yelpazedeki mallar\u0131 satt\u0131klar\u0131 bir piyasay\u0131 i\u015fletmeyi taahh\u00fct ettikleri komisyon anla\u015fmalar\u0131 yapar. D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc Senato’nun 25 Ocak 2006 tarihli karar\u0131na g\u00f6re (- 4 AZR 622\/04 -), i\u015fveren LTV Toptan Sat\u0131\u015f anlam\u0131nda toptan sat\u0131\u015f \u015firketi olmas\u0131 nedeniyle teknik kapsam\u0131na girmektedir. \u00a7 1 LTV toptan sat\u0131\u015f\u0131.<\/p>\n

\u0130\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan geli\u015ftirilen piyasa kavram\u0131, mal\u0131n m\u00fclkiyetinin do\u011frudan i\u015fverenden al\u0131c\u0131ya\/t\u00fcketiciye ge\u00e7mesi anlam\u0131na gelmektedir. Ancak perakende sat\u0131\u015f \u015firketi olarak g\u00f6r\u00fclmemelidir. Bayilerin ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z t\u00fcccarlar olarak piyasalar\u0131 kendi sorumluluklar\u0131 alt\u0131nda i\u015flettikleri komisyon s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinin yap\u0131s\u0131, komisyoncunun toptan sat\u0131\u015f sekt\u00f6r\u00fcne atanmas\u0131n\u0131 hakl\u0131 k\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. \u00d6nceki i\u00e7tihad\u0131 onaylayan D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc Senato ayr\u0131ca, bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n faaliyetinin bir \u00f6deme grubunun faaliyet \u00f6rne\u011fini kar\u015f\u0131lamas\u0131 durumunda, \u00f6deme grubuna atanan genel bir terimin s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131rma ba\u011flam\u0131nda art\u0131k ge\u00e7erli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme taraflar\u0131, \u00f6rne\u011fin ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesi halinde \u00fccret grubunun genel \u00f6zelliklerinin kar\u015f\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerini a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ifade etmek i\u00e7in faaliyet \u00f6rnekleri kullan\u0131rlar. Mahkemeler bunu yorumlarken bununla ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131rlar.<\/p>\n

D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc Senato, 23 A\u011fustos 2006 tarihli karar\u0131nda (- 4 AZR 417\/05 -) bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n tekrar tekrar d\u00fczeltici \u015fekilde yeniden grupland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n, korunmaya de\u011fer g\u00fcven nedeniyle genel olarak kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar vermi\u015ftir. \u00c7eli\u015fkili davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n yasaklanmas\u0131 ilkesine g\u00f6re, \u00f6zel ko\u015fullar kanunun uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131n iyi niyete ayk\u0131r\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fcnmesine neden oluyorsa, bu davran\u0131\u015f kanunun k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 olarak de\u011ferlendirilmelidir. Bu, \u00f6zellikle bir taraf\u0131n davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n – bilin\u00e7li veya bilin\u00e7siz olarak – di\u011fer taraf i\u00e7in \u00f6nceki durumun devam\u0131 halinde korunmaya de\u011fer bir g\u00fcven yaratt\u0131\u011f\u0131 durumlarda ge\u00e7erlidir. \u0130lgili \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n bak\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131na g\u00f6re, yeniden grupland\u0131rmay\u0131 d\u00fczelten bir i\u015fveren, \u00f6nceki s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131rmay\u0131 \u00f6zel bir dikkatle kontrol etti\u011fi ve art\u0131k yanl\u0131\u015f olarak kabul edilen orijinal toplu pazarl\u0131k de\u011ferlendirmesinden daha y\u00fcksek bir do\u011fruluk derecesine sahip bir sonuca ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131ndad\u0131r. mutab\u0131k kal\u0131nan aktivite \u00c7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n, i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi faaliyeti veya toplu i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi kanunu durumu de\u011fi\u015fmeden, i\u015fverenin bu d\u00fczeltmeyi yeniden sorgulamas\u0131n\u0131 beklemek zorunda de\u011fildir. Bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n, ilk d\u00fczeltici yeniden grupland\u0131rma s\u0131ras\u0131nda verilen s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131rman\u0131n devam etti\u011fine dair korunmaya de\u011fer g\u00fcveni, g\u00fcvenin kayna\u011f\u0131 olan i\u015fverenin bilin\u00e7siz davran\u0131\u015f\u0131yla da hakl\u0131 g\u00f6sterilebilir. \u0130lk d\u00fczeltici yeniden grupland\u0131rmada i\u015fverenin hataya ili\u015fkin olumlu bilgiye sahip olmas\u0131 \u015fart de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n

d) Kredi rezervasyonu<\/p>\n

Be\u015finci Senato, 1 Mart 2006 (- 5 AZR 363\/05 -) tarihli karar\u0131nda, genel \u015fartlar ve ko\u015fullarda yer alan ve bir \u00f6dene\u011fin dikkate al\u0131nabilece\u011fini belirten bir h\u00fckm\u00fcn, i\u015fverene a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki durumlarda \u00f6dene\u011fi azaltma hakk\u0131 verdi\u011fine karar vermi\u015ftir: standart maa\u015f artar. B\u00f6yle bir \u00e7ekince, daha ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 olarak belirtilmesi gereken nedenler dikkate al\u0131nmaks\u0131z\u0131n bile, \u00a7\u00a7 307 ve BGB uyar\u0131nca i\u00e7erik kontrol\u00fcne dayanabilir. Kararla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan \u00f6dene\u011fin \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan taraf\u0131ndan sa\u011flanan \u00f6zel hizmetleri telafi etmesi ama\u00e7lansa bile, Madde 308 No. 4 BGB’ye g\u00f6re bu madde etkisiz de\u011fildir. Bir \u00f6dene\u011fin iptal edilmesinden farkl\u0131 olarak, bunun toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme art\u0131\u015flar\u0131na dahil edilmesi, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n genel kazanc\u0131nda bir azalmaya yol a\u00e7maz. \u00c7al\u0131\u015fan a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan yaln\u0131zca \u00f6denek miktar\u0131n\u0131n de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesi makuld\u00fcr. \u0130fade, B\u00f6l\u00fcm 307 (1)’in \u015feffafl\u0131k gereklili\u011fini ihlal etmemektedir. 1 c\u00fcmle 2 BGB. Ortalama bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan i\u00e7in toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye g\u00f6re \u00f6denmesi gereken \u00fccretin artmas\u0131 durumunda \u00f6dene\u011fin toplu \u00fccret art\u0131\u015f tutar\u0131 kadar azalt\u0131labilece\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Be\u015finci Senato, kredi rezervasyonunun, anlam\u0131nda genel \u015fart ve ko\u015fullar olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesini kabul etmi\u015ftir. \u00a7 305 Abs. 1 BGB nitelikli. B\u00f6l\u00fcm 305 Paragraf\u0131na g\u00f6re. 1 BGB, genel \u015fartlar ve ko\u015fullar, bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme imzaland\u0131\u011f\u0131nda bir s\u00f6zle\u015fme taraf\u0131n\u0131n di\u011ferine sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00e7ok say\u0131da s\u00f6zle\u015fme i\u00e7in \u00f6nceden form\u00fcle edilmi\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fme ko\u015fullar\u0131d\u0131r. Bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmede kullan\u0131lan \u015fartlar\u0131n i\u00e7eri\u011fi ve d\u0131\u015f tasar\u0131m\u0131, kullan\u0131c\u0131ya birden fazla kullan\u0131m i\u00e7in form\u00fcle edildi\u011fi izlenimini verebilir ve bu durum kullan\u0131c\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan \u00e7\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclebilir. S\u00f6zle\u015fme ko\u015fullar\u0131, \u00fc\u00e7 kez kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 ama\u00e7lan\u0131yorsa, \u00e7ok say\u0131da s\u00f6zle\u015fme i\u00e7in halihaz\u0131rda \u00f6nceden form\u00fcle edilmi\u015ftir. Bu niyet, kullan\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n ayn\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fme orta\u011f\u0131yla maddeyi \u00fc\u00e7 kez kabul etmesi durumunda da kan\u0131tlanm\u0131\u015f olur. “D\u00fczenlenmi\u015f” iSv. \u00a7 305 Abs. 1 C\u00fcmle 3 BGB, yaln\u0131zca kullan\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6z konusu maddenin i\u00e7eri\u011fine ciddi \u015fekilde itiraz etmesi ve m\u00fczakere orta\u011f\u0131na, s\u00f6zle\u015fme ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n i\u00e7eri\u011fini etkileme olas\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ek olmas\u0131yla birlikte kendi \u00e7\u0131karlar\u0131n\u0131 koruyacak \u015fekilde tasar\u0131m \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc vermesi durumunda s\u00f6zle\u015fmeye ba\u011fl\u0131 bir ko\u015fuldur. Bu, kullan\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lacak s\u00f6zle\u015fmede istedi\u011fi de\u011fi\u015fiklikleri yapma iste\u011fini a\u00e7\u0131k ve ciddi bir \u015fekilde beyan etmesini gerektirir.<\/p>\n

e) Hafta sonu \u00fccreti<\/p>\n

25 Ocak 2006 tarihli bir kararla (- 4 AZR 432\/04 -) D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc Senato, Federal Toplu S\u00f6zle\u015fme’nin montaj i\u015f\u00e7ilerinin \u00f6zel \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma ko\u015fullar\u0131na ili\u015fkin B\u00f6l\u00fcm 6.3 uyar\u0131nca bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n toplu hafta sonu seyahat \u00f6dene\u011fi alma hakk\u0131na sahip oldu\u011funa karar verdi. 20 Haziran 2001’den itibaren de\u011fi\u015ftirilen 17 Aral\u0131k 1997 tarihinden itibaren, katener, havai hat, yerel a\u011f ve kablo in\u015faat\u0131 da dahil olmak \u00fczere demir, metal ve elektrik end\u00fcstrilerinde, fiili olarak k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck uzaktan montaj\u0131n bir par\u00e7as\u0131 olarak tadil edilmi\u015ftir. hafta sonu eve yolculuk. Bu, bahsi ge\u00e7en tarife h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn yorumlanmas\u0131na yol a\u00e7maktad\u0131r. Y\u00f6netmelik metnine g\u00f6re, hafta sonu eve d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f yolculu\u011funun fiilen tamamlanmas\u0131, hafta sonu yol \u00f6dene\u011fine hak kazan\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in olumlu bir \u00f6n ko\u015ful de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n

Buna ek olarak, genel toplu pazarl\u0131k ba\u011flam\u0131, k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck uzak toplant\u0131lar i\u00e7in hafta sonu \u00fccretinin, hafta sonunun \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma d\u0131\u015f\u0131 g\u00fcnleri i\u00e7in talep hakk\u0131n\u0131n hari\u00e7 tutulmas\u0131n\u0131n telafisini temsil etti\u011fini g\u00f6stermektedir. B\u00fcy\u00fck uzaktan toplant\u0131lar\u0131n aksine, d\u00fczenli montaj i\u015f\u00e7isi hafta sonu g\u00fcnleri i\u00e7in k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck uzak toplant\u0131lar i\u00e7in herhangi bir \u00f6denek almaz, b\u00f6ylece montaj sahas\u0131nda kalman\u0131n bir sonucu olarak genellikle maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ek masraflar\u0131 tek ba\u015f\u0131na \u00fcstlenmek zorunda kal\u0131r. D\u00f6nemin varsay\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n aksine, \u00fccretin amac\u0131 bu tipik ek masraflar\u0131 telafi etmektir.<\/p>\n

f) Kabulde gecikme<\/p>\n

KSchG’nin 11. Maddesi, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n, i\u015f ili\u015fkisinin fiilen sona ermesi ile i\u015fe yeniden ba\u015flamas\u0131 aras\u0131ndaki s\u00fcre i\u00e7in i\u015fverenin kendisine bor\u00e7lu oldu\u011fu \u00fccretten ne kadar mahsup etmesi gerekti\u011fini belirler. \u0130\u015f ili\u015fkisinin mahkeme karar\u0131 sonras\u0131nda devam etmesi halinde, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan, KSchG Madde 11 C\u00fcmle 1 No. 2 uyar\u0131nca, k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetle bunu yapmam\u0131\u015f olsayd\u0131 kazanabilece\u011fi \u00fccreti, bor\u00e7lu olunan \u00fccretlere yans\u0131t\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonraki d\u00f6nemde kendisi i\u00e7in kabul edilebilir bir i\u015fi kabul edin. Be\u015finci Senato’nun yerle\u015fik i\u00e7tihad\u0131na g\u00f6re, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n di\u011fer i\u015fleri iyi niyetle (\u00a7 242 BGB) ve serbest i\u015f se\u00e7imi temel hakk\u0131na (Madde 12) uygun olarak yapmas\u0131n\u0131n makul olarak beklenip beklenemeyece\u011fi incelenmelidir. \u0130Y\u0130 OYUN).<\/p>\n

\u00c7al\u0131\u015fan, yeterli bir sebep olmaks\u0131z\u0131n kas\u0131tl\u0131 olarak i\u015fi reddetmesi veya kendisine i\u015f teklif edilmesini kas\u0131tl\u0131 olarak engellemesi durumunda, k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetle ba\u015fka yerden para kazanam\u0131yor demektir. \u00c7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n kabul\u00fcn gecikmesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda i\u015fsizlik yard\u0131m\u0131 almas\u0131 durumunda, KSchG Madde 11 C\u00fcmle 1 No. 3 uyar\u0131nca, i\u015f bulma kurumundan bu yard\u0131m\u0131n i\u015fverenin kendisine bor\u00e7lu oldu\u011fu \u00fccretlerden mahsup edilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n

Be\u015finci Senato’nun 11 Ocak 2006 tarihli karar\u0131na g\u00f6re (- 5 AZR 98\/05 -), KSchG Madde 11 C\u00fcmle 1 No. 2’den, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n her durumda bir i\u015f teklifini bekleyebilece\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lamaz. Aksine, kendisine ger\u00e7ek\u00e7i bir i\u015f f\u0131rsat\u0131 sunuldu\u011funda bo\u015f durmamal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu, kendi tekliflerinizi g\u00f6ndermeyi de i\u00e7erebilir. Bir i\u015fin kabul\u00fc iSv. B\u00f6l\u00fcm 11 C\u00fcmle 1 No. 2 KSchG, bir teklifi kabul etmekle ayn\u0131 \u015fey de\u011fildir ve bir teklif gerektirmez. Ancak konu \u00f6nceki i\u015fverenindeki bir i\u015f f\u0131rsat\u0131yla ilgiliyse, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan kendisine makul bir i\u015f teklif edilip edilmedi\u011fini g\u00f6rmek i\u00e7in d\u00fczenli olarak bekleyebilir. Prensip olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n kendi inisiyatifini almas\u0131 beklenemez. Ancak, i\u015fverenin belirli bir s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde teklifte bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve teklif al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda s\u00fcrenin zaten dolmu\u015f olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirme veya ara\u015ft\u0131rma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne tabi olabilir. KSchG B\u00f6l\u00fcm 11 C\u00fcmle 1 No. 2’nin y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, makul bir teklifin ge\u00e7 al\u0131nmas\u0131na dikkat \u00e7ekme ve para kazanma f\u0131rsat\u0131n\u0131n hala mevcut olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 sorma konusunda iyi niyetli olabilir (BGB Madde 242). Senato ayr\u0131ca \u00f6nceki i\u015fveren i\u00e7in \u00e7al\u0131\u015fman\u0131n yaln\u0131zca \u015fu anlamda makul oldu\u011funa karar verdi. \u00a7 11 C\u00fcmle 1 No. 2 KSchG, ara gelir elde etmeyi ama\u00e7l\u0131yorsa. S\u00f6zle\u015fme i\u00e7eri\u011finin korunmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan i\u015f\u00e7inin i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde kal\u0131c\u0131 bir de\u011fi\u015fiklik yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 kabul etmesi gerekmemektedir.<\/p>\n

Kabul\u00fcn gecikmesine ili\u015fkin \u00f6nceki i\u00e7tihad\u0131n\u0131 s\u00fcrd\u00fcren Be\u015finci Senato, 11 Ocak 2006 tarihli bir kararla (- 5 AZR 125\/05 -), k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetle ihmal edilen kazan\u00e7lar\u0131n ve i\u015fsizlik yard\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131n alacakland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n B\u00f6l\u00fcm uyar\u0131nca orant\u0131l\u0131 olarak da\u011f\u0131t\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verdi. 11 C\u00fcmle 1 No. 2 ve 3 KSchG iki ad\u0131mda ger\u00e7ekle\u015fir: \u0130lk olarak, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetle elde edemedi\u011fi br\u00fct kazan\u00e7, i\u015fverenin bor\u00e7lu oldu\u011fu br\u00fct \u00fccretten d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmelidir. Bu \u015fekilde hesaplanan farktan, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n i\u015fsizlik \u00f6dene\u011finin ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131 mahsup etmesi gerekir; bu, br\u00fct \u00fccretin, i\u015fverenin, k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli kusur dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131ktan sonra hala \u00e7al\u0131\u015fana \u00f6demek zorunda oldu\u011fu k\u0131sm\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k gelir. para kazanmak. Katk\u0131 pay\u0131 tespit limiti tutar\u0131na kadar toplam i\u015fsizlik \u00f6dene\u011fi toplam br\u00fct maa\u015fa e\u015fit oldu\u011fundan orant\u0131l\u0131 bir tahsis yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Orant\u0131l\u0131 kredilendirme nedeniyle, i\u015fverenin borcunun yan\u0131 s\u0131ra al\u0131nan i\u015fsizlik \u00f6dene\u011fi de \u00e7al\u0131\u015fana s\u0131n\u0131rs\u0131z kalm\u0131yor. \u00d6te yandan, i\u015f bulma kurumunun hizmetleri, i\u015fvereni, i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinden do\u011fan br\u00fct \u00fccretin bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131 ve bunun sonucunda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan net tutar\u0131 \u00f6deme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden tamamen kurtarmaz. Bu orant\u0131l\u0131 tahsis B\u00f6l\u00fcm 11 KSchG’nin amac\u0131ndan kaynaklanmaktad\u0131r. KSchG B\u00f6l\u00fcm 11 C\u00fcmle 1 No. 3’teki d\u00fczenleme, i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan ge\u00e7ersiz bir fesih sonras\u0131nda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n mali a\u00e7\u0131dan daha iyi durumda olmamas\u0131n\u0131, ancak ayn\u0131 zamanda i\u015f ili\u015fkisinin fesih olmadan y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesinden daha k\u00f6t\u00fc durumda olmamas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamay\u0131 ama\u00e7lamaktad\u0131r. KSchG, B\u00f6l\u00fcm 11 C\u00fcmle 1 No. 2, i\u015fverenin \u00e7\u0131karlar\u0131n\u0131 uygun \u015fekilde dikkate alma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc getirmektedir.<\/p>\n

g) Hari\u00e7 tutma s\u00fcreleri<\/p>\n

\u0130stihdam ve toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fmeler s\u0131kl\u0131kla, ka\u00e7\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131 durumunda i\u015f ili\u015fkisinden kaynaklanan hak taleplerinin kaybedilmesine yol a\u00e7an, hari\u00e7 tutma son tarihleri \u200b\u200bi\u00e7erir. Onuncu Senato, 14 Aral\u0131k 2005 tarihli bir kararla (- 10 AZR 70\/05 -) 3 \u015eubat 1981 tarihli \u0130n\u015faat Sekt\u00f6r\u00fc Federal Toplu Toplu S\u00f6zle\u015fme \u00c7er\u00e7evesi’nin (BRTV) 16. maddesine g\u00f6re iki a\u015famal\u0131 bir ihra\u00e7 d\u00f6nemi yorumlad\u0131. 15 May\u0131s 2001 anla\u015fmalar\u0131n\u0131n versiyonunda. Federal \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi’nin yerle\u015fik i\u00e7tihad\u0131na g\u00f6re, i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmaya kar\u015f\u0131 koruma talebinde bulunulmas\u0131, genel olarak, a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki \u015fartlara ba\u011fl\u0131 talepler s\u00f6z konusu oldu\u011funda, hari\u00e7 tutma s\u00fcresi d\u00fczenlemelerinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen mahkeme d\u0131\u015f\u0131 yaz\u0131l\u0131 iddian\u0131n yerine getirilmesi i\u00e7in uygundur. \u0130\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmaya kar\u015f\u0131 koruma prosed\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn sonucu. Bu durum, ilk a\u015famadaki iki a\u015famal\u0131 ihra\u00e7 s\u00fcreleri i\u00e7in de ge\u00e7erlidir. Bu arka plana kar\u015f\u0131, in\u015faat sekt\u00f6r\u00fcndeki toplu pazarl\u0131k taraflar\u0131, i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma korumas\u0131 talebinin kapsam\u0131na giren taleplerin kendi toplu s\u00f6zle\u015fme tan\u0131mlar\u0131n\u0131 yapm\u0131\u015flard\u0131r.<\/p>\n

BRTV Madde 16 No. 1’e g\u00f6re, i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmaya kar\u015f\u0131 koruma davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmaya kar\u015f\u0131 koruma s\u00fcrecinde vadesi gelen ve sonucuna ba\u011fl\u0131 olan \u00f6deme talepleri i\u00e7in hari\u00e7 tutma s\u00fcresinin ilk a\u015famas\u0131n\u0131 korur. Onuncu Senato, bunun yaln\u0131zca i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan i\u015f ili\u015fkisinin devam etmesiyle a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olan talepleri kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verdi. Bunlar, i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma koruma davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lmadan \u00f6nce yerine getirildi\u011fi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde \u00fccret talepleridir. \u0130\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin taraflar\u0131 aras\u0131nda uygulanan \u00f6nceki usulden sapmalara dayanan talepler, i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma koruma davas\u0131n\u0131n zaman koruyucu etkisine tabi de\u011fildir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan, \u00f6deme taleplerini de yanl\u0131\u015f s\u0131n\u0131fland\u0131rmaya dayand\u0131r\u0131yorsa, ge\u00e7mi\u015f \u00fccret \u00f6demelerinin \u00f6nceki devaml\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan farkl\u0131 yeni bir hukuki zemin ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcyor demektir. Bu \u00f6deme talepleri, i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda vadesi gelmi\u015f olsa bile, i\u015ften \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lma koruma davas\u0131n\u0131n zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 etkisi kapsam\u0131na girmez.<\/p>\n

D\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc Senato’nun 25 Ocak 2006 tarihli karar\u0131na g\u00f6re (- 4 AZR 31 622\/04 -), toplu pazarl\u0131k s\u00fcrelerine tabi olan bir talebin nihai sunumu, bu s\u00fcrelere uygunlu\u011fun g\u00f6sterilmesini ve dolay\u0131s\u0131yla iddian\u0131n zaman\u0131nda sunulmas\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7ermektedir. \u0130\u015fverenin son teslim tarihine uyulmamas\u0131na g\u00fcvenmek zorunda de\u011fildir. Son teslim tarihlerine uyulmamas\u0131, hak talebine ili\u015fkin zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131ndan farkl\u0131 olarak, resen dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gereken bir itirazd\u0131r. M\u00fcnferit durumlarda, bor\u00e7lunun, \u00f6rne\u011fin ifa y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn yerine getirilece\u011fine dair g\u00fcvence vererek, alacakl\u0131n\u0131n son teslim tarihini kar\u015f\u0131lamak i\u00e7in gereken ad\u0131mlar\u0131 atmamas\u0131na neden olmas\u0131 halinde, istisna s\u00fcresi d\u00fczenlemesinin uygulanabilirli\u011fi Alman Medeni Kanununun (BGB) 242. Maddesi ile \u00e7eli\u015febilir. Resmi bir iddia olmasa bile, di\u011fer \u015fartlar\u0131n mevcut olmas\u0131 halinde yerine getirilecektir. \u0130\u015fverenin bir hari\u00e7 tutma s\u00fcresine uymaktan “feragat etmesi” durumunda, bu, bor\u00e7lunun, talebe yol a\u00e7an maddi unsurun mevcut say\u0131laca\u011f\u0131na dair tek tarafl\u0131, ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 bir beyan\u0131 olabilir. Bu, mahkemenin, talebin zaman\u0131nda sunulmas\u0131 \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n yerine getirilmesini dikkate ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 anlam\u0131na gelir.<\/p>\n

Be\u015finci Senato, 6 Eyl\u00fcl 2006 tarihli karar\u0131nda (- 5 AZR 684\/05 -), BAT’\u0131n 70. Maddesi uyar\u0131nca fazla \u00fccret \u00f6demeleri nedeniyle geri \u00f6deme taleplerinin kaybedilmesine ili\u015fkin soruyu kararla\u015ft\u0131rd\u0131. \u0130yi niyet ilkesi (\u00a7 242 BGB), yaln\u0131zca \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n i\u015fverenin hari\u00e7 tutma s\u00fcresine uymas\u0131n\u0131 aktif olarak engellemesi durumunda hak taleplerinin kaybedilmesiyle \u00e7eli\u015fmez. Ayn\u0131 durum, g\u00f6revini ihlal etmesi ve i\u015fverenin uzakla\u015ft\u0131rma s\u00fcresine uymas\u0131na neden olacak durumlar\u0131 bildirmemesi halinde de ge\u00e7erlidir. \u0130\u015fverenin \u00fccreti hesaplarken bir hata yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmesine ra\u011fmen, \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan\u0131n \u00f6nemli miktarda fazla \u00f6deme bildirmemesi durumunda genellikle g\u00f6rev ihlali varsay\u0131labilir. Ancak i\u015f\u00e7inin g\u00f6revini ihlali, i\u015fverenin eylemsizli\u011finin nedeni olmal\u0131d\u0131r. Nedensellik ancak i\u015fveren fazla \u00f6demenin fark\u0131na varmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcrece mevcuttur.<\/p>\n

Alman Medeni Kanunu’nun (BGB) 814. maddesinde oldu\u011fu gibi, bu da su\u00e7lu olmaman\u0131n pozitif bilgisine ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130\u015fi yapan ki\u015fi, muhtemelen “meslekten olmayanlar a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan paralel bir de\u011ferlendirmeye” dayanarak, hukuki duruma g\u00f6re i\u015fi bor\u00e7lu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmelidir.[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row]<\/p>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

[vc_row triangle_shape=”no”][vc_column][vc_column_text]a) \u00dccret miktar\u0131 26 Nisan 2006 tarihli bir kararla (- 5 AZR 549\/05 -), Be\u015finci Senato, Brandenburg’da devlet taraf\u0131ndan tan\u0131nan bir teknik okulun m\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn maa\u015f miktar\u0131n\u0131 ele ald\u0131. M\u00fcd\u00fcr, benzer kamu sekt\u00f6r\u00fc \u00f6\u011fretmenlerinin maa\u015f\u0131n\u0131n %75’inden daha az bir maa\u015f al\u0131yordu. M\u00fcd\u00fcr, benzer kamu sekt\u00f6r\u00fc \u00f6\u011fretmenlerinin maa\u015f\u0131n\u0131n %75’inden daha az bir maa\u015f al\u0131yordu. 1 BGB ge\u00e7ersizdir. Yasal bir i\u015flem B\u00f6l\u00fcm 138 Para. 1 BGB, i\u00e7erik \u00f6zeti, saik ve ama\u00e7tan da anla\u015f\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere genel niteli\u011fi itibariyle g\u00fczel ahlakla ba\u011fda\u015fm\u0131yorsa. Ahlak\u0131n izin verdi\u011fi \u015fey, hukuk sisteminin genel ba\u011flam\u0131ndan ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar. \u0130lgili standartlar Temel Kanun ve basit yasal d\u00fczenlemelerin de\u011ferlendirmelerini i\u00e7ermektedir. Be\u015finci Senato,…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":10685,"parent":13703,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-14499","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\/bag-kararlari-2006\/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\/bag-kararlari-2006\/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=\"2023-12-04T06:59:52+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=\"22 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\\\/bag-kararlari-2006\\\/tazminat\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/bag-kararlari-2006\\\/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\\\/bag-kararlari-2006\\\/tazminat\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/bag-kararlari-2006\\\/tazminat\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/11\\\/Bundesarbeitsgericht_Urteile_2006.webp?fit=200%2C100&quality=20&ssl=1\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-11-20T07:22:28+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-12-04T06:59:52+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\\\/bag-kararlari-2006\\\/tazminat\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"tr\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/bag-kararlari-2006\\\/tazminat\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"tr\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/bag-kararlari-2006\\\/tazminat\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/11\\\/Bundesarbeitsgericht_Urteile_2006.webp?fit=200%2C100&quality=20&ssl=1\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/11\\\/Bundesarbeitsgericht_Urteile_2006.webp?fit=200%2C100&quality=20&ssl=1\",\"width\":200,\"height\":100,\"caption\":\"Bundesarbeitsgericht Urteile\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/bag-kararlari-2006\\\/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\":\"BAG kararlar\u0131 2006\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\\\/tr\\\/is-hukuku-kararlari\\\/bag-kararlari-2006\\\/\"},{\"@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\/bag-kararlari-2006\/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\/bag-kararlari-2006\/tazminat\/","og_site_name":"Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Anwalt Hamburg Berlin Bremen Hannover L\u00fcbeck","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/STEINWACHSRechtsanwaltskanzlei\/","article_modified_time":"2023-12-04T06:59:52+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_site":"@rasteinwachs","twitter_misc":{"Tahmini okuma s\u00fcresi":"22 dakika"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/bag-kararlari-2006\/tazminat\/","url":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/bag-kararlari-2006\/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\/bag-kararlari-2006\/tazminat\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/bag-kararlari-2006\/tazminat\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Bundesarbeitsgericht_Urteile_2006.webp?fit=200%2C100&quality=20&ssl=1","datePublished":"2023-11-20T07:22:28+00:00","dateModified":"2023-12-04T06:59:52+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\/bag-kararlari-2006\/tazminat\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"tr","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/bag-kararlari-2006\/tazminat\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"tr","@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/bag-kararlari-2006\/tazminat\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Bundesarbeitsgericht_Urteile_2006.webp?fit=200%2C100&quality=20&ssl=1","contentUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/11\/Bundesarbeitsgericht_Urteile_2006.webp?fit=200%2C100&quality=20&ssl=1","width":200,"height":100,"caption":"Bundesarbeitsgericht Urteile"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/bag-kararlari-2006\/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":"BAG kararlar\u0131 2006","item":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/is-hukuku-kararlari\/bag-kararlari-2006\/"},{"@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\/14499","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=14499"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/14499\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/13703"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10685"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.kanzlei-steinwachs.de\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14499"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}