T.R. SUPREME COURT
- Law Office
Basis: 2016/8402
Decision: 2016/7559
Decision Date: 13.07.2016
ACTION FOR DAMAGES – DECISIONED BY THE REJECTED JUDGE ON THE OPINION ON THE REJECTION OF THE APPLICATION, BY THE AUTHORITY AGAINST THE FILE, THE REJECTION REJECTION IS REJECTED AND THE DEFENDANT BEEN PUNISHED WITH A disciplinary monetary penalty.
SUMMARY: Upon the rejection of the judge’s opinion stating that the request should be rejected, the decision rendered by the authority examining the file regarding the rejection of the request on the merits, and the punishment of the defendant … with a disciplinary fine of …………..-TL, the defendant … attorney. appealed by. The reasons put forward for the judge’s refusal are grounds for appeal in terms of the merits of the case, and are not among the reasons defined in Article 36 of the CPC.
(6100 S. K. Art. 36)
Litigation and Decision: During the compensation lawsuit between the parties, the defendant’s attorney applied to the judge for refusal.
After the defendant’s attorney … requested that the decision rendered by the authority examining the rejection request be examined by the Supreme Court, after the decision to accept the appeal petition, which was understood to be in time, all the documents in the file were examined and the necessary was considered:
In summary, with the petition dated 09/02/2016 submitted by the defendant’s attorney during the lawsuit between the parties; (…that the work accident that is the subject of the lawsuit is Turkey’s biggest work accident; The request for the removal of the measure against the rights and receivables of TKİ, which is the only source of income, was rejected without justification, the “legal aid” requests made by the plaintiff party were accepted without conducting the economic situation research required by the law, and it was possible to get a report from a single file for many lawsuits filed regarding the incident. Judgment from the file of the High Criminal Court No. either Contrary to the civil court, the criminal proceedings are doing much more extensive research, the outcome of the criminal proceedings, at least the expert report, must be awaited in order to make a fair decision, the amount of non-pecuniary damages awarded in the lawsuits filed against the client company due to the same incident is very exorbitant, the amount of compensation awarded is determined by the court. While the court judge should give the decision in the last session, write a short decision in summary, and then send the reasoned decision to the parties, which contradicts his own decisions, the court judge also wrote the reasoned decision that he had prepared together with the final decision, together with the short decision, and that his client made a short appeal and justified it. Claiming that he lost the time he needed to write the appeal petition later, the judge lost his impartiality, objectivity and independence, and took his side with the plaintiffs due to the pressure of the public and the press…) has been found.
Upon the rejection of the judge’s opinion stating that the request should be rejected, the decision rendered by the authority examining the file regarding the rejection of the request on the merits and the punishment of the defendant … with a disciplinary fine of 1,500,00.-TL, was appealed by the attorney of the defendant ….
The reasons put forward for the judge’s refusal are grounds for appeal in terms of the merits of the case, and are not among the reasons defined in Article 36 of the CPC. On 13.07.2016, it was unanimously decided to reject the objections of appeal that are out of place for the reasons explained, and to APPROVE the verdict, and to charge the appellant with the following approval fee.
