UncategorizedWork Accident Case


What is Work Accident?

Occupational accident is an accident that deals with the physical and subsequent mental problems that occur while the worker is working at the employer’s workplace or outside the workplace.

Occupational accidents can occur despite all precautions being taken. Compensation for the damage is on the employer, because of the contract between the employee and the employer. We hold the employer responsible for reasons such as measures that the employer did not take or took insufficiently, accidents caused by bad working conditions. Occupational accident does not only refer to a physical phenomenon, it also brings mental events.

The bad working environment mentioned above actually exemplifies both. In poor working environments, the worker can be injured, injured or die. Of course, the worker who is harmed by the bad working environment will feel psychologically collapsed by thinking about how he will work again in the coming years, how he will not be afraid while doing the same work, in addition to the physical damage he has received. In order to eliminate all these negative effects caused by work accidents, we apply to compensation cases.

13 of the Social Insurance and General Health Insurance Law No. 5510. The cases that are considered work accidents according to the article are as follows:

  • Physical and mental damages suffered by the worker while he is at the workplace,
  • If the insured works independently due to the work carried out by the employer, all kinds of events that occur due to the work he is carrying out,
  • Losses incurred by the worker during the time spent without performing his/her main job due to the fact that the insured working for an employer is sent to another place outside the workplace as an official,
  • Losses incurred by the insured lactating woman during the time allotted to give milk to her child in accordance with the labor legislation,
  • Any accident that occurs while the insured travels to and from the place of work with a vehicle provided by the employer and renders the insured immediately or later physically or mentally disabled is considered a work accident.

The concept of workplace in an occupational accident does not mean a place covered with 4 walls. The physical and mental damage of the worker due to the work relationship is considered as a work accident. The place of occurrence of this event does not have to be a workplace. The key event here is to face an adverse event while being in a place due to a business relationship.

What is Work Accident Compensation Case?

Work accident compensation case is the case for which compensation is requested to the relatives or herself in case of injury or death of the worker working at the workplace.

Against Who Can A Work Accident Compensation Case Be Filed?

Work accident compensation lawsuit can be brought against the employer, if any, against the lower level employers by the person or their relatives who have been harmed due to the work relationship. If a worker of another small company working under a large company is injured or dead, both companies are jointly liable and can claim material and moral damages.

To explain by giving an example, a construction company named A will have the elevator of its construction made by elevator company B. If an employee of company B is injured or killed as a result of any accident, companies A and B are jointly liable.

Workplace Separation and Situations That Can Be Considered Accident

The worker does not have to be injured or die due to a work relationship while at work. A worker who is sick and has a heart attack while at the workplace can also file a claim for compensation. The term workplace here does not mean a 4-walled workplace. Couriers’ workplaces are generally on the streets and their accident is counted as a work accident. The term workplace here can be any place at the time the job is performed.

Time and Timeout to File a Compensation Case in Work Accident

Our right to claim compensation due to work accident is 10 years from the moment of the incident. After these 10 years, our claim for compensation becomes time-barred and we cannot file a lawsuit. The result of the work accident has no effect on the duration of the lawsuit.

If a criminal case has been filed due to a work accident, for example, a construction company is responsible for 2 workers who fell down and died because of not using a construction safety net, and a criminal case is filed. The statute of limitations in this case is applied in excess of the statute of limitations in the work accident case.

Who Can File a Work Accident Compensation Case?

Compensation lawsuits to be filed due to work accident can be filed by Citizens of the Republic of Turkey or foreigners with a work permit or their relatives. The important thing to open these compensation cases is the work permit.

What Should Employees Do Without a Work Permit?

In order for an accident to be qualified as a work accident and for the employer to be responsible for this accident, a contract between the employee and the employer must be officially insured. Exceptionally, uninsured employees cannot file this lawsuit. When uninsured employees have a work accident, they cannot file a work accident compensation case, but they can request material and moral compensation. In this context, the legislator has granted such a right.

Material and Moral Damages in Work Accident



It is a compensation case that should not be forgotten, which can be claimed as a result of psychological harm caused by the effects of bodily harm experienced by the worker in the workplace. The non-pecuniary damages can be demanded from the injured worker, or from the relatives of the worker who are affected by the damage.

Financial compensation

The claim for pecuniary compensation is claimed as a result of the accidental injury of the worker. If the worker has become incapacitated, incapacity compensation is requested. As it can be understood from the incident, the claim for compensation is the greatest right and need since the worker has become incapacitated and cannot work with this process.

If the injury suffered by the worker is such that there will be permanent disability, permanent incapacity compensation is requested. Since the worker is no longer able to work, she can no longer sustain herself and her dependents and demands compensation. For permanent incapacity compensation, it is sufficient to lose 10% of the normal workforce.

Being injured and permanently disabled does not mean that there are only visible injuries. Occupational diseases are also included in this situation, for example, in the case of a mine worker’s respiratory tract inability to function as before and shortness of breath as a result of damage to his lungs due to too much coal dust, there is permanent damage and inability to work.

In case the worker dies as a result of an accident, compensation for deprivation of support is demanded. This case is support compensation for those who are left behind as they can no longer take care of their dependents upon the death of the worker. These persons may be the mother, father, sibling, spouse or child of the worker. This claim for compensation can only be filed with the death of the worker.

In Charge and Authorized Court in Work Accidents

The court responsible for the work accident is the Labor Courts. In terms of jurisdiction, the court of the place where the accident took place or the residence address of the employer is authorized.



  1. Law Office 2013/15008 E., 2013/21708 K.

“Justice Text”

COURT: Civil Court of First Instance

The plaintiff requested the payment of material and moral compensation arising from her disability as a result of a work accident.
Court as specified in the decrees, has decided to reject the request.
After the verdict was appealed by the plaintiff’s attorney with a hearing, after it was understood that the appeal request was in time and after the report prepared by the Investigation Judge and the papers in the file were read, the case regarding the appealed provision was brought under Article 438 of the Code of Civil Procedure. After it was decided to reject the request for the Supreme Court examination to be held with a hearing, since it did not comply with any of the limited and numbered situations in the article, the necessity of the job was considered and the following decision was determined.


The case is about the claims of the claimant insured for the compensation of material and moral damages due to the work accident on 13.01.2008.
Although the court decided to reject the case on the grounds that the relationship between the parties was not based on a contract of service, that this relationship was a contract of work and that the incident was not a work accident, this conclusion was not deemed appropriate due to the following reasons.
The definition of work accident is made in the 11th article of the Law No. 506 and the 13th article of the Law No. 5510. According to Article 11 of the Law No. 506, which was in force on 13.01.2008, when the accident occurred, while the insured was at the workplace, the lactating woman was the insured’s work during the times spent without performing her main job due to the employer’s transfer of the insured to another place on duty. Occupational accidents are defined as the incidents that occur while the insured is brought to and from the place of work in a vehicle provided by the employer, during the times reserved for giving milk to their child, and which causes the insured to malfunction, either physically or mentally, immediately or later.
In addition, the Institution’s work accident investigation reports are valid documents until the contrary is proven, and if a damaging event is accepted as a work accident as a result of the investigation made by the Institution, the contrary is a matter that can only be revealed by judicial action. In cases of determination that an event accepted by the Institution as a work accident is not a work accident, it is obligatory to consider the SSI and the relevant employer as adversaries, since the right areas are affected.
After the explanations made so far, it is understood from the scope of the file that the incident on 13.01.2008 was accepted as a work accident by the Institution and the Institution paid the accident person from the occupational accident insurance branch according to 40.20% disability.
As such, as it is understood that the incident in which the injured claimant was injured by the Institution as a work accident and payment was made to him from the work accident insurance branch, the assessment or determination that the aforementioned damaging event was not a work accident, as explained above, will only be opened by those who claim otherwise. It is a matter that can be brought forward with the “detection that there is no accident” case. Because the cases of determination that an event is not a work accident are related to the right of SSI in one aspect, and SGK is not a party in these compensation cases. Accordingly, in this case, where the Institution is not a party, the Court decided to reject the case with the assessment that the incident was not a work accident, and it was not correct. In addition, in terms of the court’s way of acceptance, even if the aforementioned event is not a work accident, there is a tortious act, it is not correct to give a decision on the merits of the case in terms of the proceedings made by the Labor Court in an event that cannot be considered as a work accident, and here the general jurisdiction of the settlement authority is the courts of general jurisdiction. It is also wrong to ignore the fact that
The first thing to be done is to ask the defendant whether he will file a lawsuit for the determination of whether the incident on 13.01.2008 is not a work accident, to wait for the result of this determination lawsuit if the defendant declares that he will file this lawsuit, if it is finalized with this determination that the incident is not a work accident, by giving a decision of non-jurisdiction and submitting the file to the Civil Court of First Instance. otherwise, it consists of getting to the heart of the matter and evaluating all the evidence together and making a decision.
In that case, the objections of the plaintiff’s attorney aiming at these aspects should be accepted and the provision should be overturned.
CONCLUSION: It was unanimously decided on 25/11/2013 that the judgment be overturned for the reasons explained above, and that the appeal fee be returned to the plaintiff upon request.






Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

+90 546 971 14 84

Follow us:

Copyright © Turkuvazsoft Seo Service 2022