The debate on which court has competence for the settlement of disputes arising from the prohibition of competition related to the period after the termination of the employment contract has been re-ignited with the enactment of the Labor Courts Law on 25.10.2017. As a result of the reference to the section of the Turkish Code of Obligations on labor contracts in LCL Art. 5/I-a, it has been suggested that the General Assembly of Civil Chambers decisions given in 2012 and 2013 are out of the judgment and these opinions have started to be reflected in the judicial decisions. The 13th and 43rd Civil Chamber of the Istanbul Regional Court of Justice have jurisprudence that the labor court has competence. Following these, many commercial courts of first instance started to give the decisions of non-competence. The 12th Civil Chamber of the Istanbul Regional Court of Justice makes a definite decision that the commercial court of first instance has jurisdiction. 9th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation reverted to its previous opinion and decided that the labor courts has competence.In this article, at the point of determining the competent court of the lawsuits filed due to the employee's non-competition agreement, the LCL Art. 5/I-a is not the conclusion reached in the debate, but at the point of re-flaring the debate, our opinion will be put forward in the light of doctrine and new judicial decisions. However, at the point reached, there is still no consensus on the subject, which has been discussed for decades but is thought to have ended with the decisions of the General Assembly of Civil Chambers in 2012 and 2013, in both doctrine and judicial decisions. This discussion and the decisions made by the difference courts in different directions for the same dispute show that the problem of competence has now become "gangrene".