KCC 705/2016
The initial dispute involved payments on termination of employment. A key issue was the validity of the ruling as it had been announced by different judges than those who heard the case.
Background
An employee filed a case against a company before the department of labour dispute settlement. She requested the company to pay her remaining financial entitlements. She said that the company had dismissed her from her job without paying these entitlements. The department referred the case to the court.
The court dismissed the case.
The employee appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court upheld the appealed ruling.
The employee appealed the ruling before the court of cassation.
The office of public prosecution requested the court to dismiss the appealed ruling. The office said in its ground of appeal that the ruling was invalid. The office said that the ruling should include the names of the judges who had considered the ruling and that the judges who consider the case should announce the ruling according to Article 112 and 116 of the Advocacy Law. The office said that the ruling lacked these details.