T.C. SUPREME GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF LAW E. 2017/12-1147 K. 2017/1304 T. 8.11.2017 * REQUEST CANCELLATION OF THE OFFICIAL TRANSACTION BY WAY OF COMPLAINT (IF THE CREDITOR HAS REQUESTED A LIEN WITHIN A ONE–YEAR PERIOD, THE FAILURE TO SEIZE THE DEBTOR’S PROPERTY WITHIN THE SAME ONE-YEAR PERIOD DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT THE RIGHT TO REQUEST A […]
Summary: In order for a legal transaction or act to be recognized as remaining within the scope of the Turkish Commercial Code, there must be a legal transaction or act related to a commercial enterprise with the issues regulated in this law, the definitions of which are given above, within the purpose of the law. […]
T.C. SUPREME 22. law office MAIN NUMBER: 2015/16933 DECISION NO: 2017/19050 DECISION DATE: 25.9.2017 >>IF THE WOMAN WORKER GIVING BIRTH IS NOT ALLOWED TO USE THE “MILK LEAVE”, SHE CAN REQUEST A 50% INCREASE IN THE MILK LEAVE FEE It was understood that the decision made as a result of the case between the parties […]
T.C. SUPREME 9.law office Basis: 2015/7967 Verdict: 2017/2059 Decision Date: 16.02.2017 EMPLOYEE RECEIVABLES CASE – THE RELEASE AGREEMENT HAS THE PLAINTIFF’S SIGNATURE – THE SIGNATURE IS NOT DENIED BY THE PLAINTIFF – THE WILL-CRIPPLING SITUATIONS ARE NOT PRESENT IN THE CONCRETE CASE – DUE TO THE REJECTION OF THE CASE IN TERMS OF THE RECEIVABLES […]
T.C. SUPREME 8.law office Basis: 2017/16734 Verdict: 2018/252 Decision Date: 11.01.2018 REFUSAL OF THE FAMILY BOND LAWSUIT – THE ONE-YEAR REDUCTION PERIOD WILL BEGIN AS OF THE DATE OF LEARNING – DOUBT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED SUFFICIENT IN TERMS OF LEARNING – IT MUST BE ACCEPTED THAT THE CASE WAS OPENED WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT – […]
T.C. SUPREME 20. law office MAIN NUMBER: 2017/9857 DECISION NO: 2017/9650 DECISION DATE: 20.11.2017 >>THE COMPETENT PLACE FOR THE OBJECTION TO THE APPRAISAL IS THE EXECUTIVE CIVIL COURT. SUMMARY: The competent Executive Civil Court for the objection to the valuation discretion.. if the valuation has been made by another Enforcement Directorate by means of an […]
T.C SUPREME 4. law office MAIN NUMBER: 2017/3553 DECISION NO:1561 DECISION DATE: 06.03.2018 >>TERMINATION OF THE TENDER, THE DECISION TO ARRANGE THE DAMAGE CAUSED BY THE LATE DELIVERY OF THE IMMOVABLE PROPERTY DUE TO THE TERMINATION OF THE UNFAIR Decommissioning CASE. The plaintiff … Tic.Ltd.Şti. her attorney by the defendant with the petition against unfair […]
T.C. SUPREME 4. law office MAIN NUMBER: 2016/6461 DECISION NO: 2018/777 DECISION DATE: 12.2.2018 >>REQUEST FOR COMPENSATION ARISING FROM A TORT BETWEEN MERCHANTS – ABSENCE OF THE LEGAL ENTITY OF THE ORDINARY PARTNERSHIP – INCLUSION OF ALL PERSONS FORMING THE PARTNERSHIP IN THE Decease 2004/m.67 ABSTRACT: In an ordinary partnership, since the partnership does not […]
T.C SUPREME 8. law office MAIN NUMBER: 2017/16895 DECISION NO: 2018/1753 DECISION DATE: 07.02.2018 COURT : Family Court TYPE OF CASE : Liquidation of the Property Regime >>THE PROPERTY REGIME IS A RIGHT ARISING FROM THE LAW TO PARTICIPATE, AND THE SPOUSE WHO CLAIMS THIS RIGHT DOES NOT NEED TO HAVE INCOME OR CONTRIBUTE TO […]
T.C SUPREME 2.law office MAIN NUMBER: 2016/6764 DECISION NO: 2017/6194 DECISION DATE: 25.05.2017 >> EVEN IF THERE IS NO FAMILY HOUSING ANNOTATION, THE TRANSACTION MADE WITHOUT THE EXPLICIT CONSENT OF THE SPOUSE IS INVALID LAWSUIT: At the end of the trial between the parties, the verdict given by the local court, the date and number […]