Precedent from the Constitutional Court: Compensation for Unlawful Dismissal
Official titleDecision of the Constitutional Court Dated 28/1/2026 and Application Number 2021/15434
The Constitutional Court held that the non-compensation of the material and non-material damages suffered by a teacher, whose working permit was unlawfully revoked on the grounds of working at a school closed down under a Decree Law (KHK), arising from being unable to work for 3 years constitutes a violation of the right to property and the right to respect for private life.
Details of the Regulation
The applicant teacher was unable to practice their profession for approximately three years after their working permit was revoked upon the closure of the private educational institution where they worked by a Decree Law (KHK) in 2016. The applicant secured the annulment of the administrative act by proving that they had resigned from the institution prior to the date of closure, and subsequently filed a lawsuit for material and non-material damages regarding the period during which they were unable to work. The local administrative court entirely dismissed the claim for material damages on the grounds that future income was not certain, and only partially accepted the claim for non-material damages. The Constitutional Court stated that the applicant's loss of income stemming from being unable to work for three years was based on concrete data and that the local courts' blanket rejection of the claim for compensation violated the right to property. Furthermore, it was ruled that the right to respect for private life was violated due to the failure to fully cover the non-material damages of the applicant, who was excluded from their professional and social life. The Court sent the case back to the administrative court for the elimination of the violation and for the calculation of compensation through a retrial.
Questions You Might Have
- Should everyone whose working permit is unlawfully revoked apply directly to the Constitutional Court?
- No, first, lawsuits for annulment and full remedy (compensation) must be filed in administrative courts, and an individual application must be made to the Constitutional Court within 30 days after domestic remedies have been completely exhausted.
- Why did the Constitutional Court not rule for direct monetary payment to the applicant?
- Since determining and calculating the amount of material damage is a technical matter, the Constitutional Court made a finding of violation and sent the case back to the local administrative court to perform this calculation properly.
Key Terms
- Tam Yargı Davası
- A type of administrative lawsuit filed by individuals whose rights have been violated due to administrative acts or actions for the compensation of the material and non-material damages they have suffered.
- Yeniden Yargılama
- The process in which the case is reheard before the court of first instance to eliminate the consequences of the violation in line with the Constitutional Court's violation decision.
- Mülkiyet Hakkı
- An individual's constitutional guarantee over assets of monetary value, claims, and definitive future income expectations.
Where we posted this
Follow Turkish legal developments
REGAS analyzed all 32 items in the Official Gazette of 8 June 2026; we published only 3 of them here.
REGAS summarizes every change in the Turkish Official Gazette in plain language and notifies you.
The REGAS app is currently Turkish-only. If you would like English in the app, the best way to make it happen is to support the developer: get the app and just say so.
REGAS Commentary
Thanks to this precedent decision, the right of all citizens whose licenses, permits, or authorizations were unlawfully revoked by administrative acts, and who were therefore unable to work, to claim retroactive loss of earnings has been finalized. Courts will no longer be able to easily reject claims for compensation under the pretext of 'uncertain income'.