Engin Sokullu who
 joined Özay Law Firm in 2015 provided services to national and international
 companies in fields of Contracts Law, dispute resolution, Commercial Law and
 Law of Obligations in Turkish and English languages, mainly in the field of
 Labor and Social Security Law, and he has been working as the head of Labor Law
 department for a long time. Engin Sokullu who is experienced in Labor Law
 disputes has also joined collective labor agreement negotiations. 



Engin Sokullu, who
 was completed his master’s degree in the field of Private Law at Marmara
 University, wrote his graduation project on “Material Change in Working
 Conditions” again in the field of Labor Law. 



Engin Sokullu, who
 believes that providing legal services after closely knowing the client will
 create difference and who emphasize the importance of preventative law,
 provides the clients interactive Labor Law trainings customized according to
 the clients’ fields of operation, job descriptions of employees and concrete
 problems, cooperates with various associations and organizations and organizes
 trainings with large participation. 



Engin Sokullu also
 holds expert and mediator certificate. Practice Areas &amp; Work Department

Labor
 &amp; Social Security Law

Contracts
 Law

Dispute
 Resolution

Commercial

Criminal
 Law 

Languages

English
 (Advanced)

German
 (Beginner) 

Memberships

Istanbul
 Bar Association and Union of Turkish Bar Associations

The
 Association of Attorneys of Beşiktaş Fans (Founder Member)

Yeditepe
 University Alumni Association

Ozay Law Firm, which started with 6 people in 2013, has grown at a
 rate of approximately 35% per year in terms of number of attorneys and
 currently operating with 70 people in total.

&nbsp; 

We have adopted the principle of developing the litigation and
 consultancy sides equally and have given importance to this balance in order
 for each side to benefit each other. With this service mentality, in 8 years,
 we have reached the number of corporate clients exceeding 75, with whom we are
 currently cooperating. Having started with five corporate clients in the
 beginning, we believe that our positive reputation in the sector and the high
 level of contentedness of our clients have brought us this outstanding success.
 We mainly prefer to establish long-term and broad-scaled co-operations rather
 than individual projects or lawsuits. Based on this approach, we mainly provide
 support to our clients in their whole litigation and/or consultancy processes
 and make aggregate reporting in order to have access to a broad perspective regarding
 the legal situation of the company.

&nbsp; 

Ozay Law Firm, primarily offer legal services to companies
 operating in retail, industry, construction, education, e-commerce, food,
 logistics, energy, pharmaceuticals, fast moving consumer goods, technology, human
 resources and banking sectors at national or international level, which
 services are available in foreign languages.

&nbsp; 

Ozay Law Firm’s founder Merter Özay represents the office through
 his roles as Chairman of the Joint Commission of Retailing Assembly of Turkey
 and E-Commerce Assembly of Turkey under the organisation of the Union of
 Chambers and Commodity Exchanges of Turkey; Deputy Chairman of the Board of
 Food Retailers Association and Chairman of the Legislation Committee; Chairman
 of the Legislation Committee of Chain Stores Association; Shopping Malls and
 Retailers Federation of Turkey Legislation Committee Chairman; Tourism
 Restaurant Investors and Gastronomy Enterprises Association; member of the
 Swiss Chamber of Commerce in Turkey, PWN (Professional Women’s Network) and
 Lead Network. Our office is thus in contact with governmental authorities for
 the purpose of resolution of legal problems of the sector and we offer our
 advice and contribution in the legislation process.

Ozay Law Firm

Head of Employment Department

03.03.2023 tarihli ve 32121 sayılı Resmî Gazete’de yayımlanan Sosyal Sigortalar ve Genel Sağlık Sigortası Kanunu ile 375 Sayılı Kanun Hükmünde Kararnamede Değişiklik Yapılmasına Dair Kanun ile, 8 Eylül 1999 tarihi ve öncesinde sigortalı olup da prim gün sayısı ...

Sosyal Sigortalar ve Genel Sağlık Sigortası Kanunu ile 375 Sayılı Kanun Hükmünde Kararnamede Değişiklik Yapılmasına Dair Kanun ile Getirilen Yenilikler

&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Annual
paid leave is a right to rest that derives its source from the Constitution and
its principles are regulated in the Labor Code and the Regulation on Annual
Paid Leave. In Article 53 of the Labor Code, the conditions for entitlement to
annual leave and the minimum number of days are determined, and despite the
regulation based on the code, there are still problems that confront the
employee and the employer in practice and are subject to disputes. In practice,
it is seen that Saturdays are also counted as annual leave days and this issue
will be examined in this article.&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Article
53 of the Labor Code stipulates that annual paid leave shall be granted to
employees who have worked for at least one year, including the probationary
period, from the day they start working at the workplace, that the right to
annual paid leave cannot be waived, and that the period of annual paid leave to
be granted to employees shall be determined by the length of service and cannot
be less than;&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;ul style="list-style-type: square;">&lt;li style="margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Fourteen
days for those with one to five years (including five years),&lt;/span>&lt;/li>&lt;li style="margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Twenty
days for more than five years and less than fifteen years,&lt;/span>&lt;/li>&lt;li style="margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Twenty-six
days for those with fifteen years (inclusive) or more.&lt;/span>&lt;/li>&lt;/ul>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">The
duration of annual paid leave to be granted to employees aged eighteen and
under and employees aged fifty and over may not be less than twenty days, and
finally, the aforementioned annual leave periods may be increased by employment
contracts and collective labor agreements.&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">In
the evaluation of this issue, it will undoubtedly be necessary to examine the
regulations on week holidays together with the regulations on annual leave.
Pursuant to Article 46 of the Labor Code, a week holiday is defined as a 24-hour
uninterrupted rest day within a 7-day period after a 45-hour work week.
Therefore, as a rule, one day a week (Sunday in most workplaces) is considered
as a week holiday and Saturday is considered as a working day. Although this is
the general rule, since it is possible to distribute the working hours of 45
hours per week differently, provided that they do not exceed eleven hours per
day in accordance with Article 63 of the Labor Code, it is possible to work 5
days as working days and give 2 days off, which is the general practice,
especially for white-collar employees. In the event that 5 days of work are
performed at the workplace and Saturday and Sunday are holidays, Saturday is
not considered as a working day, but as a contractual holiday. In this case, in
other words, in the event that it is not explicitly written in the employment
contract that Saturday is a week holiday, it will not be contrary to the law to
deduct Saturday from the remaining leave period.&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">In
the event that there is no working on Saturday at the workplace, the Court of
Cassation has ruled that the unworked Saturday will not be added to the annual
leave period due to the fact that it is a contractual holiday. In other words,
one more day will be deducted from the remaining leave period due to the
Saturday remaining in the annual leave period, only Sunday will be considered
as a week holiday and will not be deducted from the annual leave period. At
this point, in order to be able to deduct Saturday from the annual leave days,
there should be a situation such as, for instance, the employee going on annual
leave on Thursday and starting work on Monday. In simpler terms, Saturday can
only be deducted from the number of leave days if and only if it falls within
the leave period. In our example, the relevant employee will be considered to
have used 3 days of annual leave (Thursday, Friday and Saturday).&lt;/span>&lt;span style="font-size: 12px;">[1]&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">The
decision of the 22nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation numbered 2019/7906
E. is also in this direction;&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify; margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">"...the clear regulation in the employment contract is that
Saturday will be counted as a working day and the week holiday period will be
one day (24 hours) while using the annual paid leave right. Since this
regulation is not contrary to the relative mandatory provision in Article 46 of
the Labor Law No. 4857, which states that "at least twenty-four hours of
uninterrupted rest (week holiday) shall be given within a seven-day
period", it is necessary to apply by counting only one day period as a
week holiday within the time period when the workers use their annual paid
leave right..."&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">Although
it is regulated in the Labor Code that 24 hours of uninterrupted rest within a
7-day period is a week holiday, it may be agreed in the employment contract
that Saturday is also a week holiday in favor of the employee. In the event
that it is clearly determined in the individual and collective labor agreement
that Saturday and Sunday are week holidays, both days will not be counted from
the annual leave period in accordance with paragraph 5 of Article 56 of the
Labor Code, because the relevant regulation is as follows;&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify; margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">"Article 56 - (f.5) In the calculation of annual paid leave days,
national holidays, week holidays and general holidays that coincide with the
leave period are not counted from the leave period"&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">In
other words, this time, Saturdays and Sundays that fall within the annual leave
period will not be taken into account in the annual leave calculation, and
Saturday will be considered as annual leave and 1 more day will not be deducted
from the remaining leave period. For example, an employee who takes annual
leave on Thursday and starts work on Monday will be deemed to have used only 2
days of annual leave in total, on Thursday and Friday.&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">Finally,
it should be noted that even if it is agreed in individual and collective labor
agreements that Saturday is a week holiday, if it is clearly stated that
Saturday, which is added to the week holiday, will be counted as a working day
in the annual leave calculation, 1 more day will be deducted from the remaining
annual leave period due to the Saturday falling within the annual leave period;
Sunday will not be deducted from the annual leave period due to being a week
holiday. For example, an employee who takes annual leave on Thursday and starts
work on Monday will be considered to have taken 3 days of annual leave
(Thursday, Friday and Saturday). In a decision of the 22nd Civil Chamber of the
Court of Cassation, this issue has been clearly ruled.&lt;/span>&lt;span style="font-size: 12px;">[2]&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">As
a result, the situation can be summarized as follows as a result of the
evaluation of the legal regulations regarding annual leave and weekends;&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;ul style="list-style-type: square;">&lt;li style="margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">As
a rule, if the employment contract does not stipulate that Saturday is a week
holiday, but there is no actual work on Saturday at the workplace, 2 days will
be deducted from the remaining annual leave period of the employee who takes
annual leave on Friday, and the employee will be deemed to have taken annual
leave on both Friday and Saturday.&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/li>&lt;li style="margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">Unlike
the general rule, in the event that it is agreed in individual and collective
labor agreements that Saturday is a week holiday, one day will be deducted from
the remaining annual leave period of the employee who takes annual leave on
Friday, and since Saturday and Sunday are considered as week holidays, these
days will not be included in the annual leave period.&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/li>&lt;li style="margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">Even
if it is agreed in individual and collective labor agreements that Saturday is
a week holiday, if the contract also clearly states that this Saturday, which
is added to the week holiday, will be counted as a working day in the annual
leave calculation, 2 days will be deducted from the remaining annual leave
period of the employee who is on annual leave on Friday, and he will be
considered to have used annual leave on both Friday and Saturday.&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/li>&lt;/ul>&lt;hr>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">&lt;strong>[1]&lt;/strong>&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;"> (İş Hukukunda İçtihat
Farklılıklarının Giderilmesi Kararları ve Yorumu (Yargıtay 9. HD'nin İş
Hukukundaki İçtihat Farklılıklarının Giderilmesi Yönündeki 2020 Yılına Ait 41
Kararı), Av. Ahmet Evcimen, 1st Edition, January 2021, p.5)&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">&lt;strong>[2]&lt;/strong>&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;"> 22nd Civil Chamber of
Court of Cassation Decision No: E. 2018/9873, K. 2018/22569, T. 18.10.2018&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>

Annual paid leave is a right to rest that derives its source from the Constitution and its principles are regulated in the Labor Code and the Regulation on Annual Paid Leave. In Article 53 of the Labor Code, the conditions for entitlement to annual leave and the minimum number of days are determined, and despite the regulation based on the code, there are still problems that confront the employee and the employer in practice and are subject to disputes. In practice, it is seen that Saturdays are also counted as annual leave days and this issue will be examined in this article.

Evaluation of Saturday in the Use of Annual Leave

&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">In the Turkish law system, the
prohibition of competition is regulated under Article 444 of the Turkish Code
of Obligations ("TCO"), and the restrictions, which constitute the
subject matter of this article, are regulated under Article 445 of the TCO as
follows;&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify; margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;em>"The prohibition of competition may not contain
unfair restrictions to compromise worker’s economical future in an appropriate
form for time and types of work and the term of prohibition may not be more
than two years except for specific cases and conditions.&lt;/em>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify; margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;em>The judge may limit the prohibition of competition by freely
evaluating all conditions and circumstances as well by considering
counter-performance of the employer in a just manner for the scope or time.”&lt;/em>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">In this respect, elements of the
non-competition agreement are;&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;ul style="list-style-type: square;">&lt;li style="margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">To determine the maximum period (maximum for 2
     years) for which the employee must comply with the non-competition
     obligation,&lt;/span>&lt;/li>&lt;li style="margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> To draw the provincial/territorial borders where
     the non-competition obligation will apply,&lt;/span>&lt;/li>&lt;li style="margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> To settle the subjects/what type of work to be
     performed are in scope of the non-competition obligation of the
     employee.&lt;/span>&lt;/li>&lt;/ul>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">Agreements that do not carry out the
regulations stipulated under TCO on the aforementioned 3 factors are not
considered valid. However, in practice, it is observed that the maximum
limitation concerning time is generally complied with in non-competition
agreements/ provisions, but geographical restrictions are not imposed or the
restrictions are kept broad. Surely, the reason for the legislator to stipulate
the above-mentioned time and geographical region limitations is that the
legislator aspires to protect the commercial interests of the employer while
protecting the employee's constitutional right to work and economic freedom.
Apparently, the legislator is trying to protect the balance of interests,
especially since it is generally accepted that employees have relatively less
negotiating power compared to employers. The Court of Cassation has also
decided in one of its decisions&lt;/span>&lt;span style="font-size: 12px;">[1]&lt;/span>&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">
that non-competition clauses that do not include a geographical limitation shall
not be valid;



&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify; margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;em style="">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">“In the substantial case, the non-competition
provision in the service contract subject to the lawsuit between the
parties&nbsp;&lt;/span>&lt;u style="">&lt;strong>is lack of a geographical area limitation, and since this
deficit jeopardizes the economic future of the employee unfairly&lt;/strong>&lt;/u>&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">, the
contractual provision regarding the non-competition must be deemed null and
void according to the freedom of work and legal regulations explained above.
While the court should have decided by considering this issue, its acceptance
with the written justification was not correct and the decision had to be
reversed for this reason."&lt;/span>&lt;/em>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">On the other hand, it is known that the
Court of Cassation may conclude different decisions regarding the matter. For
instance, if the non-competition clause in the employment agreement is not
subject to a geographical restriction or is agreed on a large scale that
endangers the economic freedom of the employee, it has been ruled by the Court
of Cassation&lt;/span>&lt;span style="font-size: 12px;">[2]&lt;/span>&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;"> that these limits should
be drawn by the court if the potential danger is high and/or the
counter-performance undertaken by the employer is also high.&nbsp;



&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify; margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;em style="">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">"In the substantial case, although&nbsp;&lt;/span>&lt;u style="font-size: 14px;">&lt;strong>there
is no restriction in terms of the geographical area&lt;/strong>&lt;/u>&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">&nbsp;in the
non-competition clause in the employment agreement between the parties, Article
445/2 of the TCO stipulates that the court may limit the excessive non-competition
clause in terms of the scope or duration of the excessive non-competition
provisions by freely evaluating all the circumstances and conditions and by
taking into account the counter-performance that the employer may have
undertaken equitably. In line with this regulation,&nbsp;&lt;/span>&lt;u style="">&lt;strong>while a limitation
should be imposed by the court in terms of geographical area&lt;/strong>&lt;/u>&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">, it is not
appropriate to rule that the non-competition agreement is invalid."&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/em>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;">The above-mentioned decisions of the
same chamber of the Court of Cassation, which dated closely to each other,
indicate that the evaluation may vary in each case and that the criteria such
as the employee's salary from the previous employer, his/her fund of knowledge,
and the possibility of causing serious commercial damage to the previous
employer are meticulously examined. In fact, there is even a decision of the
Court of Cassation&lt;/span>&lt;span style="font-size: 12px;">[3]&lt;/span>&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;"> stating that even a
10-year non-competition clause, which may greatly jeopardize the economic
freedom of the employee, should be determined reasonably by the judge in
accordance with Article 445/2 of the TCO;



&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify; margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;em>“In the substantial case, the agreement between the
parties stipulated a 10-year non-competition period, and the place where the
non-competition would be valid was determined as the provinces and districts
within the Aegean and Marmara Region, especially Kemalpaşa district. Paragraph
445/1 of the TCO regulates the limitation of time and place for such
agreements, and the second paragraph of the same article provides that the
court may limit the scope or duration of excessive non-competition provisions.&lt;/em>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify; margin-left: 20px;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;em>In this case, while the court should evaluate and
discuss the contract dated 19/01/2012 between the parties within the framework
of Article 445/2 of the TCO No. 6098 and reach a conclusion, it was not
appropriate for the Regional Court of Appeal to decide to reject all of the
plaintiff's claims on written grounds, and it required a reversal."&lt;/em>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">To summarize, it is seen that the Court
of Cassation, especially in the recent period, has significantly valued Article
445/2 of the TCO, and in order to ensure the balance of interests that the
legislator aims to achieve, the non-competition clauses in the agreements are
adjusted in terms of duration and limitations according to the circumstances of
the particular case, the gain and potential danger possibilities of the
parties. Considering the recent and contradictory decisions of the same
chamber, we would like to express that we strongly believe that it is
beneficial to agree on non-competition clauses in accordance with Articles 444
and 445 of the TCO from the outset.&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;hr>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;strong>[1]&lt;/strong>&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;"> 11th
Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation decision numbered 2017/3251 and 2019/805,
dated 04.02.2019&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;strong>[2]&lt;/strong>&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;"> 11th
Civil Chamber of Court of Cassation decision numbered 2017/200 and 2018/6359,
dated 16.10.2018&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&lt;/p>&lt;p style="text-align: justify;">&lt;span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">&lt;strong>[3]&lt;/strong>&lt;span style="font-size: 14px;"> 11th Civil Chamber of Court of Cassation
decision numbered 2018/1016&nbsp; and
2019/6713, dated 24.10.2019&lt;/span>&lt;/span>&nbsp;&lt;/p>

The Court of Cassation, especially in the recent period, has significantly valued Article 445/2 of the TCO, and in order to ensure the balance of interests that the legislator aims to achieve, the non-competition clauses in the agreements are adjusted in terms of duration and limitations according to the circumstances of the particular case, the gain and potential danger possibilities of the parties. Considering the recent and contradictory decisions of the same chamber, we would like to express that we strongly believe that it is beneficial to agree on non-competition clauses in accordance with Articles 444 and 445 of the TCO from the outset.

Lawyers Nihat Engin Sokullu

Nihat Engin Sokullu

Sosyal Sigortalar ve Genel Sağlık Sigortası Kanunu ile 375 Sayılı Kanun Hükmünde Kararnamede Değişiklik Yapılmasına Dair Kanun ile Getirilen Yenilikler

Evaluation of Saturday in the Use of Annual Leave

Evaluation of the Geographical Limitation Requirement of the Prohibition of Competition Clause in the Light of the Decisions of the Court of Cassation