Is Resigning Due to Mobbing Considered Justified Termination? In light of the examined court decisions; it has been determined that mobbing (psychological harassment) applied in the workplace, when certain conditions and evidentiary requirements are met, constitutes a reason for “justified termination” for the employee within the scope of Article 24/II of Labor Law No. 4857. However, judicial authorities link the exercise of this right to the conformity of mobbing with its definition, its continuity, and its power of proof.
Below, the conditions under which mobbing is considered justified termination, the burden of proof, and the approach of judicial bodies to the matter have been detailed.
1. Definition of Mobbing and Essential Elements for Justified Termination
In Supreme Court decisions, mobbing is defined as a set of malicious behaviors by one or more individuals in the workplace, systematically targeting a specific person, extending over a long period, and aiming to intimidate, marginalize, and remove them from their job.
Condition of Continuity and Systematics: In the decisions of the Supreme Court 22nd Civil Chamber (2017/42766) and 9th Civil Chamber (2017/16925), it was emphasized that rude behaviors which do not show continuity, are carried out in momentary anger or remain isolated, cannot be qualified as mobbing. For actions to be considered mobbing, they must become systematic.
Attack on Personal Rights: The Supreme Court 22nd Civil Chamber (2012/24019) stated that in cases where personal rights and health are severely attacked, the existence of mobbing will be undeniably accepted and that this constitutes a valid reason for termination.
Targeting: The actions must directly target the plaintiff employee, rather than being a general workplace tension (Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber 2017/17931.)
2. Legal Consequences If Mobbing Is Proven
In cases where the allegation of mobbing is proven with concrete evidence (witness, e-mail, health report, etc.), the employee’s resignation is accepted as “justifiable termination” and the employee becomes entitled to severance pay.
Right to Severance Pay: The Supreme Court General Assembly of Law (2017/486) and the Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber (2021/12218) ruled that in cases where mobbing is proven, the employee justifiably terminated their employment contract and should receive severance pay.
Moral Damages: In the event of mobbing, in addition to severance pay, demands for moral damages are also accepted due to the violation of the employee’s personal rights (Supreme Court 22nd Civil Chamber 2017/42766; Ankara Regional Court of Justice 8th Civil Chamber 2017/1380).
Principle of Prima Facie Proof: The 9th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court (2021/12218) stated that in mobbing cases, the method of “prima facie proof” can be adopted, and if the employee presents facts strongly supporting their claim (e.g., medical reports diagnosing anxiety or depression), the burden of proving the contrary may shift to the employer.
3. Cases Where Mobbing Claims Were Rejected and Termination Was Not Deemed Justified
In a significant portion of court decisions, the employee’s termination was not deemed justified and their compensation claims were rejected, due to the mobbing claim remaining abstract or not being proven.
Insufficient Evidence: The 22nd Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court (2014/32562) and the 9th Civil Chamber (2025/2247) ruled that if the plaintiff could not present concrete events to support their mobbing claim or if witnesses did not corroborate these claims, the termination was not based on a just cause.
General Workplace Rudeness: General “stress, rude behavior, or a manager’s harsh tone in the workplace is not considered mobbing if it does not directly and systematically target an individual. In such cases, actions remaining at the level of “workplace rudeness” were not considered mobbing, and termination based on this was not deemed justified (Supreme Court 22nd Civil Chamber 2013/11788; 22nd Civil Chamber 2014/23860)
Content of the Resignation Letter: If the employee states “personal reasons” or “family reasons” in their resignation letter and subsequently claims mobbing, this is rejected as being contrary to the ordinary course of life (Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber 2019/7243)
4. “Alternative” Situations Where Termination is Deemed Justified Even if Mobbing Cannot Be Proven
In some decisions, even if the elements of mobbing are not fully established or cannot be proven, the termination has still been deemed justified due to other injustices the employee was subjected to.
Insult and Swearing: Even if the systematic elements of mobbing are not present, an employer or their representative insulting an employee (even if it’s a one-time occurrence) is a just cause for termination under Article 24/II of the Labor Law (Supreme Court 22nd Civil Chamber 2016/27899 22nd Civil Chamber 2015/29410
Unpaid Receivables: Even if the employee cannot prove the claim of mobbing, if they prove that overtime or other wage receivables have not been paid, the termination is deemed justified on this ground, and severance pay is awarded (Supreme Court 9th Civil Chamber 2023/9686; 9th Civil Chamber 2016/15761).
Health Reasons: Even if the elements of mobbing are not present, if working conditions harm the employee’s health (e.g., a report of a herniated disc), this can be considered a just cause for termination (Supreme Court 22nd Civil Chamber 2014/23860).
Substantial Change in Working Conditions/Demotion: Even if mobbing cannot be proven, the employee’s demotion or constant change of assignment location has been considered a just cause for termination on its own (Supreme Court 7th Civil Chamber 2016/23374Source; 9th Civil Chamber 2020/9019Source).
5. The Situation for Public Employees
According to the decision of the Council of State 12th Chamber (2018/5157Source), for a person who has resigned from civil service to benefit from certain legal rights (e.g., Provisional Article 44 of Law No. 5510) by claiming to have resigned due to mobbing, special conditions are sought, such as the resignation having occurred as a result of a disciplinary penalty. A resignation made solely on the claim of mobbing has not been evaluated as a “forced departure” within this scope.
Conclusion: According to judicial decisions, leaving employment due to mobbing constitutes termination with just cause. However, for this right to arise, it is essential that the mobbing is; systematic, continuous, targeted, and proven with concrete evidence (or strong indications). In cases where mobbing claims cannot be proven, if there is no other just cause (insult, unpaid wages, fundamental change), the employee’s severance pay request is rejected. A paper suggestion.
Why is Expert Lawyer Support Necessary?
Termination of an employment contract due to mobbing is an extremely complex process that requires technical knowledge and a strong proof strategy. The criteria sought by the Court of Cassation in mobbing cases – systematicity, targeting, intent, continuity, strong evidence structure, and causal link – often cannot be fully established without professional legal support. For this reason, mobbing cases, especially in regions with intense business life such as Istanbul, Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe, Kadıköy, Ataşehir, Ümraniye, Gebze, Dilovası, and Çayırova, must be handled by an expert lawyer.
2M Law Office, offers professional support in proving the claim of mobbing, strategically collecting evidence, properly guiding witnesses, analyzing workplace records, evaluating the legal validity of doctor’s reports, and ensuring the process complies with the “just cause termination” conditions under Article 24/II of Labor Law No. 4857.
Expert lawyer support is vital for the following reasons:
Legally accurate analysis of whether mobbing is systematic
Inclusion of witnesses and evidence in the file in accordance with Court of Cassation criteria
Preparation of correct arguments against the employer’s defenses
Full and complete assertion of claims such as non-pecuniary damages, severance pay, and bad faith compensation
Proper management of collateral processes such as criminal cases, labor inspector reports, and ethics committee applications
Termination of the process without the employee losing all their rights in case of just cause termination
Mobbing is a serious violation of rights that directly affects the employee’s mental health, professional reputation, and financial future. For this reason, when the process is managed with the experience of 2M Hukuk Law Firm operating in Tuzla, the probability of success significantly increases, and the employee is prevented from suffering a loss of rights.
