EN SUPREME COURT
Law Office
Originally: 2016/8402
The Verdict: 2016/7559
Decision Date: 13.07.2016
CASE FOR COMPENSATION – THE DECISION OF THE REJECTED JUDGE ON THE OPINION OF THE REJECTION OF THE APPLICATION, AS DECIDED BY THE OFFICIAL WHO DECIDED AGAINST THE FILE, THE CASE WAS DISMISSED AND THE ACCUSED WAS PUNISHED WITH A DISCIPLINARY FINE.
SUMMARY: The rejection of the judge’s opinion that the request should be rejected, the rejection of the request on the merits by the authority examining the file, and the defendant …’s …………..-Upon the decision to punish him with a TL disciplinary fine, the defendant … has been appealed by his attorney. The reasons put forward regarding the judge’s refusal are the grounds of appeal in terms of the merits of the case and are the 36th amendment of the CCP. not for the reasons stated in the article.
(Art. 36 of Art. 6100)
Trial and Decision: In the compensation case between the parties, the defendant’s attorney has submitted a request for Decertification to the judge.
After the defendant’s attorney … requested that the decision made by the authority examining the rejection request be reviewed by the Supreme Court, all the documents in the file were examined and made necessary upon the decision to accept the petition of appeal, which was apparently granted on time:
In summary, with the petition dated 09/02/2016 submitted by the defendant’s attorney in the case between the parties; (…it was found that the workplace accident subject to the lawsuit is the biggest workplace accident in Turkey; the request to remove the injunction against the rights and receivables of TKI, the only source of income, was rejected without justification, the Decrees of the plaintiff’s “legal aid” requests were accepted without conducting the economic situation research provided for by law, it is possible to obtain a report from a single file for a large number of lawsuits filed in connection with the incident.
Unlike the decision from the file of the Criminal Court or the civil court, the criminal trial conducts much more thorough research, in order to make a fair decision, the result of the criminal trial, at least the expert report, should be expected, the amount of moral compensation awarded in cases filed with the client company due to the same incident is very exorbitant, and the amount of compensation awarded is determined by the court.
While the court judge had to make his decision at the last hearing, write a short decision in summary and then send the reasoned decision to the parties, it was determined that he contradicted his own decisions, the court judge also wrote the reasoned decision prepared with the final decision together with the short decision, and his client filed a short objection and justified it, claiming that he lost the time he needed to write the appeal petition, then lost his impartiality, objectivity and independence due to public and press pressure, and took the plaintiffs’ side …).
Upon the rejection of the judge’s opinion that the request should be rejected, the request was rejected on the merits by the authority examining the file and the defendant … about 1,500.00.-The decision to impose a TL disciplinary penalty has been appealed by the defendant’s attorney.
The reasons put forward by the judge regarding the refusal are grounds of appeal in terms of the merits of the case and are 36 of the CCP. not for the reasons stated in the article. It was decided unanimously on 13.07.2016 to reject the appeal objections, which are inappropriate for the reasons explained, to CONFIRM the judgment and to upload the following approval fee to the appellant.