NEWSLETTER-2020-metin

280 NEWSLETTER 2020 A Precedent Decision of the Court of Cassation on Uncertain Receivable Lawsuits and the Prohibition to Give Unexpected Judgments* Att. Sevgi Ünsal Özden Introduction Through Civil Procedural Law numbered 6100 (“CPL”), which entered into force in 2011, a new type of lawsuit, uncertain receivable lawsuit, was introduced into our law system. This introduction brought about differences of opinion on various significant issues regarding lawsuits for indefinite claims. In fact, in practice, and in the doctrine, there are different opinions as to which lawsuits could be filed as un- certain receivable actions, and how to decide if the receivable subject to the lawsuit is specifiable. Even amongst the chambers, whose area of specialization is “Labor and Social Security Law,” different evalua- tions were made on similar cases and opposing decisions were given. In this context, some chambers argued that in the case of bringing a legal action for an unspecified claim where the amount or value of the receivables could actually be determined, the claimant should be given time to declare the requested amount or value and to pay the remaining fee, while the others defended that the lawsuit should be rejected due to the lack of legal interest. The mentioned differences of opinion were even subject to the claim for unification of the decisions. However, the Grand General Assembly of the Unification of the Case Law of Court of Cassation did not decide to unify the case law, stating that it is not possible to specify the receivables as certain or uncertain every time, even for the same type of labor receivables, and that a decision should be made according to each concrete case 1 . * Article of October, 2020 1 The Grand General Assembly of the Court of Cassation on the Unification of the Case Law, 2016/6 E., 2017/5 K., 15.12.2017.