271 / 469
LABOR LAW
257
the relationship could be terminated by a dissolving constitutive
declaration by either of the parties. First of all, the offerer
must have a reasonable interest in conclusion of an abrogation
agreement.
Although terminations of employment relationships through
abrogation agreements were not common in the period of Act.
No. 1475 and previously, they have become more common
following the entry into force of Labor Act. No. 4857 due
to its job security rules. At this point, it is possible that the
provisions for job security can be dismissed by conclusion of an
abrogation agreement even though the transaction, in reality, is
a termination of an employment relationship by the employer. In
this respect, the reasonable interest of the parties in concluding
an abrogation agreement must be determined separately from the
control of intention defects. Reasonable interest is determined by
considering whether the employee or the employer is the offerer,
and the characteristics of the instant case must be taken into
account.
An employee whose employment agreement is terminated
through an abrogation agreement is not entitled to severance
or notification compensation which are the rights related to a
termination transaction, and he or she will be deprived of job
security. The employee cannot benefit from unemployment
insurance within the scope of Act. No. 4447. All these issues
justify the need to interpret in favor of employees on the point of
the validity of the abrogation agreement as the principle of strict
interpretation is a rule in labor law for release contracts.
The parties may also stipulate in an abrogation agreement the
notification, severance, and job security compensation. The
validity of abrogation agreements will be evaluated considering
all these points.
” (9th Civil Chamber of High Court of Appeals
E. 2008/1888, K. 2008/25058, T. 25.09.2008)
In addition to the decision of the 9
th
Civil Chamber of the Court of
Appeal mentioned above, which analyses the approach to the issue of