Sample Petition For Response
03 Oct. ADDITIONAL SAMPLE ANSWER ANSWER
At 19:07, Barış kaya was sent to the Petition Samples category 0 Comments
0The Lieutenant
Share
Termination of Ordinary Partnership
THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
file number :
prosecutor :
lawyer :
THE DEFENDANT :
lawyer :
SUBJECT : Our response to the other party’s response petition.
descriptions
First of all, we reiterate the content of our petition for the renewal of the trial,
1-My client …….. about ……….. The Court of First Instance ……….. the main ………. The decision on the file numbered decision, Court of Cassation 11. Department of Law ………. With the main numbered decision …………. It has been confirmed and finalized in its history.
2-The client has deposited the total amount ……… TL, which is the subject of compensation due to the enforcement proceedings filed against his client, into the relevant Enforcement Directorate file, provided that his rights are reserved. Receipt is attached. Oct. As a result, the amount of compensation that is the subject of compensation has been fully paid by my client.
3- The main documents attached to this petition, in which our statements were submitted together with documents before the decision of the relevant Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, and we also submitted our petition dated………, Which will greatly affect the merits of the case, and will change the course of the case, supporting it with documents. Oct……. The main documents attached to this petition.
4- On the other hand…….. October October Our dated petition and the attached documents were sent by APS method, although the documents were sent to the relevant office of the Court of Cassation, as can be seen from the dated receipt document ……… And the attached petition example, unfortunately, the Supreme Court 11. The Legal Department, the documents in question ………… He did not examine it because he approved it in history.
“First of all, the work in question does not belong to the participant………
1-As it is known, the Law No. 5846 is related to the protection of the owners of works. Within the framework of this explanation, it can be said that if a work has been created as a result of ideas and intellectual labor, this work is an exclusive, personal work.
In the light of these explanations, it is understood that the work in question is not the work of the participant.
In addition, the work in question, the participant ……….. by “………………” His name was recorded at …… Address, including the folk song in question. Although the recording in question was not requested by the Court at the trial stage, the relevant TRT organization officials stated that the video footage and information records of the recording in question were requested by the Court.
2- As can be understood from the documents in the file, the work in question “………..” Compiled by and the work in question ………… registered by.
In this regard, the source person of the work in question is not the compiler of this work …………’ dir.
3-As it is known, the performance of folk songs that have become publicly available and accepted by everyone and anonymous folk songs whose origin is unknown does not constitute a crime of violation of law No. 5846, nor does it lead to any claims. In terms of copyright law.
The work in question is ……. It is a registered work by. 50 years ago with this anonymous feature.
However, no one as a person has the authority to register a work.
Also,
1- Participle …….. in the compensation case filed by the Turkish Radio and Television Corporation against …….. At the Intellectual and Industrial Rights Civil Court, in particular, “You are a rose in the gardens, Five Finger mountain ranges, summer flower laugh, I bought a handkerchief from the stream …” as a result of the trial of the compensation case filed in relation to folk songs, the Court ………. History and ……….. ……….. As can be seen in the decision paragraph of the numbered decision, it was decided to “dismiss the case” and in the last part of the reasoned decision of the relevant Court;
“… The defendant institution does not include folk songs belonging to real people and not anonymous in its repertoire, the artist who compiled the folk songs in question ………’ it is understood that he died in 1963 and the artist who compiled these folk songs died in 1963. The records in question have been publicly available for about fifty years in a way that the participant personally knows, the participant is obliged to provide strong evidence to prove that the anonymity of the folk songs in question is fake, those that were issued before the above-mentioned dates or those that were determined from the documents that the defendant institutions and authorities officially registered due to their duties. However, such evidence has not been submitted to our Court.
For this reason, it is not possible to participate in the opinions of the second expert panel, which does not contain any attribution, in the style of the personal opinion of the owner of the works that are the subject of judgment in the TRT repertoire. the registration is the participant who is the source person in the report of an official or private scientific study organized by the second expert committee.” By its interpretation and evaluation, it determined the material reality and as a result, it was clearly registered by the Court decision that the compiler of the folk song in question was not present and that the work “I bought a handkerchief from the city” was copyrighted. As we stated in our objection petition …………… compiled by.
2-Similarly ………….. “…As described above, the Source Person who brings the existing, known, i.e. “Anonymous” melodies into the repertoire; given to the participant upon the participant’s application ……….. in the dated reply post ………..it is not true that he claims that the lyrics and music of all these melodies belong to him …”.
3- Participant ………….. upon Oct. application made by, ……… sequence number ………… He requested to be included in the repertoire as the source person for the folk song named. ….. But in the same way, the relevant institution again stated, “…With the establishment of Mesam, fees began to be paid for melodies in the composing genre, and therefore people began to resort to this type of music. Attempts have been made to collect royalties. As explained above, it is not true that the source person claims that the lyrics and music of these melodies belong entirely to him …” and his application was rejected again on the same grounds.
4- Upon the applications of the participant ……….. ………. As a result of the examination conducted by an authorized expert named; “…It is unthinkable that a cultural product belonging to society should be owned by a single person. In this case, it is thought that it would be appropriate to continue the protection of the folk songs mentioned above with their current identities.” The assessment made by a musicologist has also been forwarded to your Supreme Court.
5- Again, an anonymous folk song taken from the TRT archive, a handkerchief is a handkerchief that I bought from the city from the outstanding Turkish Folk Music artists of our country ………. A sample of the notes related to the compilation has also been submitted with notarized approval.
Although the attorney of the opposing party requested the dismissal of the case due to the time limit, it was understood that there was no time limit in this direction when the decision on the merits of the case was made according to the provisions of the renewal of the trial, it was understood that the finalized court decision on the folk song subject to the case was available and the requests of the attorney of the opposing party were not appropriate,
Result and demand;
For the reasons explained
Considering the documents I have submitted regarding the request subject to the lawsuit and the content of the court decisions with the annotation of finalization, I request that the case be dismissed and that the trial expenses and attorney’s fees be charged to the other party.
I am submitting my request here. Kindest regards,
.
Deputy
You can reach our other article samples and petition samples by clicking here.