The 13th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals has started a new period in the cases that will take the final decision. The court counted the documents of information carriers in electronic media such as Whatsapp, Facebook, e-mail as evidence in the claims.
Precedent decision for Facebook and WhatsApp from the Supreme Court!
A worker agreed with a lawyer for the cancellation of the premium debt accrued by the Social Security Institution without signing a contract. The lawyer, who claimed that he did not attend the first hearing in the case, canceled his power of attorney upon this incident.
Claiming that he is a creditor despite this claim, the lawyer initiated enforcement proceedings about the worker. When the plaintiff worker faced a great shock, he went to the Civil Court of First Instance.
He noted that the defendant lawyer was dismissed before even attending the first hearing of the case, the requested attorney’s fee was exorbitant, and a portion of the attorney’s fee was paid to the persons determined upon the instructions of the defendant, and this issue was fixed through correspondence between the parties.
In the decision of the Supreme Court, which pointed out that there is no written wage agreement between the parties; The following statements were included:
“In the e-mail correspondence sent to the plaintiff by the defendant lawyer; The fee breakdown has been made regarding the lawsuit to be filed with SGK. It is understood that the e-mail correspondence specified by the court has not been evaluated. In the law; It is written, “Data such as written or printed text, deed, drawing, plan, sketch, photograph, film, image or sound recording, and data in electronic environment and similar information carriers that are suitable for proving the facts of the dispute are documents according to this Law.”
With this regulation, mail correspondence has been accepted as a document. In that case, the court should evaluate the e-mail correspondence and the payments made by the plaintiff and decide whether the plaintiff is a debtor or not, but the decision to dismiss the case in writing with incomplete examination is against the procedure and the law and is the reason for the reversal. It was unanimously decided to quash the court’s verdict. “