T.C.
SUPREME
13.LAW OFFICE
E. 2010/1116
K.2010/12853
T.11.10.2010
A request for a refund of the cost of a defective product (in the face of the fact that the service distracts the consumer with repairs that cannot be obtained, and the failure repeats for certain periods, the existence of a statute of limitations cannot be mentioned in the case)
Statute of limitations (request for return of the price of defective goods – the fact that the service distracts the consumer with repairs that cannot be obtained, and the failure repeats for certain periods cannot be mentioned in the case of the existence of a statute of limitations)
Shame arising from the seller’S severe defect (the statute of limitations cannot be used if the shame of the Goods Sold is hidden from the consumer by the seller’s severe defect or deception)
Request for the return of the defective vehicle (the case has not expired – the interest must be executed from the date of Return of the defective vehicle to the defendant in the claim, which is ruled that the vehicle subject to the lawsuit is still in the use of the plaintiff)
4077 / m.4/4,23
Summary: the case is a request for a refund of the price of the defective property. It is unthinkable that the consequences of having Service employees who work to repair the vehicle by trial and error and go on the path of changing parts cost the consumer. In the face of the fact that the service distracts the consumer with repairs that cannot be obtained, and the failure repeats for certain periods, there can be no mention of the existence of a statute of limitations in the case. As a matter of fact, in Article 4/4 of Tkhk No. 4077, which is amended by law No. 4822, “but if the shame of the goods sold is hidden from the consumer by the seller’s severe defect or deception, the statute of limitations cannot be used.”the decision has been made.
Cases heard in consumer courts are subject to a simple trial procedure and the statute of limitations can be put forward until the first hearing. The case has not expired. However, since the vehicle subject to the lawsuit is still in the use of the plaintiff, the interest must be executed from the date of Return of the defective vehicle to the defendant.
Case: at the end of the trial of the case for restitution of the decriminalized property between the parties, the decision given in part for partial acceptance of the case for reasons written in the ad was sent to the interested parties after the defendant D… Auto lawyer appealed without a hearing by the plaintiff’s lawyer. The hearing was started when the defendant’s attorney and the plaintiff’s attorney arrived on a certain day, and after the oral statements of the lawyers present were heard, the decision was left for another day. This time, it was determined that the appeal was in the period of time, and the file was examined, and the need was discussed and considered:
Decision: the plaintiff, defendant G… Automotive Limited Company purchased the vehicle had manufacturing errors, the other defendant was the importer of the vehicle, claiming that the price he paid,70,929.00 TL collection was decided.
The defendants argued for dismissal of the case.
The court decided to dismiss the case against the defendant G… Automotive Limited Company and accept the case against the other defendant; the verdict, the plaintiff and the defendant D… Automotive A.P. appealed by.
1-according to the articles in the file, the evidence on which the decision is based, the necessary reasons in accordance with the law, and in particular, the lack of a hit in the evaluation of the evidence, the plaintiff and the defendant D … Automotive A.P.other appeals that fall outside the scope of the following subpoenas must be dismissed.
2-On 4.5.2006, the plaintiff, the defendant G … Automotive Ltd. Şti.it is clear from the evidence in the file that there was a manufacturing defect in the vehicle he bought from and that it was secretly defective. However, according to the court, the defendant is G… Automotive Ltd. Şti.on the grounds that there is a statute of limitations in the term of, it was decided to dismiss the case against this defendant due to the statute of limitations. The vehicle in question was taken to the authorized service five times between Dec.9.12.2006 and 25.4.2008 due to the same malfunction (low traction). There is no doubt that there is a manufacturing error in the vehicle in the face of the evidence in the file and it is a secret shame. Authorized service stations must have elements that can diagnose the malfunction and defect correctly and completely, eliminate it as soon as possible and literally.
It is inconceivable that the consequences of having service employees in service who are trying to repair the vehicle by trial and error and who are going down the path of changing parts will cost the consumer. In the face of the fact that the service distracts the consumer with inconclusive repairs and the malfunction repeats with certain periods, there can be no mention of the existence of a statute of limitations in the case. As a matter of fact, in Article 4/4 of Tkhk No. 4077, which is amended by law No. 4822, “but if the shame of the goods sold is hidden from the consumer by the seller’s severe defect or deception, the statute of limitations cannot be used.”the decision has been made. (Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 18.2.2004 day 2004/ 4-29 E-2004/83 K). The court should decide on the merits of the case from the point of view of the defendant G… Automotive Limited Liability Company, while the refusal of the case from the statute of limitations in writing is contrary to the procedure and the law.
3-Defendant D … Automotive A.P.in the response petition, the statute of limitations was found to be Def, and the court decided to accept the case against this defendant on the grounds that this statute of limitations was not within the term of Def. Article 23/2 of Tkhk No. 4077 amended by Law No. 4822 “cases to be heard in consumer courts shall be taken in accordance with the provisions of the seventh Babi of Humk and the fourth chapter.”the decision has been made. In this case, cases heard in consumer courts are subject to simple trial and the statute of limitations may be put forward until the first hearing. The date of the first hearing in the concrete case is 27.11.2008. Defendant D … Automotive A.P.the response petition in which the statute of limitations is filed is dated 6.11.2008. So the defendant is D … Automotive A.P.although the statute of limitations is within the time limit of Def’i, 2. for the reasons described in the paragraph, the case has not expired. However, since the vehicle subject to the lawsuit is still in the use of the plaintiff, the interest from the date of Return of the defective vehicle to the defendant should be executed, while the interest from the date of 2.5.2008 notice is the cause of violation.
Conclusion: for the reasons described in the first paragraph, the plaintiff and the defendant D … Otomotiv A.P.for the rejection of other appeals, the decision appealed for the reasons described in the second paragraph is in the interest of the plaintiff, for the reasons described in the third paragraph, the defendant D … Automotive A.P.for the benefit of corruption, 750.00 TL trial attorney’s money to be paid to each other by mutual receipt, 960.00 TL received in advance. a unanimous decision was made on 11.10.2010 on the return of the appeal fee to the defendant D… Auto and plaintiff in case of request.
