TC
Supreme
Law Office
E. 2015/15599
K. 2018/332
T. 15.1.2018
At the end of the Decider between the parties in the case described above
The dismissal of the case by the court and the plaintiff’s
it has been decided to appeal the decision on this issue, the apartment file has been examined, as required:
DECISION :
Conditional follow-up based on the debtor’s proxy’s declaration that he will receive alimony against his client
paid June 2013, but alimony is being paid regularly, but as of June 2013
stating that the joint children remained with the client, 6.000,00 with interest
TL has requested that a decision be made to cancel the follow-up in terms of child support of the affiliate.
The court’s decision on the change of custody was finalized on 01.10.2014 and,
in the court decision regarding the granting of another alimony instead of custody, a lawsuit was filed with the request to remove the subsidiary alimony
and since there is no provision, alimony continues until 01/10/2014, which is requested in the follow-up
it was decided to reject the appeal request on the grounds that the child support belongs to before this date and
the judgment has been appealed by the debtor’s attorney.
In the case-law of the Court of Cassation, which has gained continuity; in terms of child support decided in favor of
finding the child’s creditor so that the debtor can be held responsible for paying child support,
if the debtor claims that he stayed with his child, proof of this claim is required
in this case, the rule that this claim can be proved by any kind of evidence, including a witness, has been adopted.
The basis of the pursuit in the concrete case … 2. The date of the Family Court 20.01.2012 and 2012/25
following the finalization of the decision on two joint children by Decision No. 2012/22
It was decided to pay the alimony of participation in the amount of TL and the decision was finalized on 27.02.2012.
Creditor by proxy … 4. In the follow-up file of the Enforcement Directorate dated 22.08.2014 and numbered 2014/10726
with the request of participation and poverty support follow-up in the period 27.08.2013-27.07.2014
receivables have been requested. … 1. Family Court’s No. 2014/31 dated 03.06.2014 2014/294
according to the numbered decision, joint custody of the children was given to the father and the decision was finalized on 01.10.2014,
it has been finalized in its history.
Alimony of the debtor in respect of the children who are ruled in favor of alimony
in order to be held responsible for paying, the child must be with the creditor.
The debt claiming otherwise shows that the joint children have been with them since June 2013.
he claims that he remains, and this claim can be proved by any kind of evidence. Testimony of the debtor party
it is based on the evidence.
Accordingly, the Court stated that as of June 2013, the joint children
since the debtor’s decision to leave without listening to his witnesses, he has remained with his father
it is not accurate.
CONCLUSION:
The court decision on the acceptance of the debtor’s representative’s objections is above
366 of the IIK and 428 of the HUMK. it is written with justification in their articles. In accordance with the EXEMPTION clauses, by the parties
366/3 OF the IBL. according to the article. 10 Of the decision of the Court of Cassation against extradition. as of the date of notification in accordance with the article
a decision may be requested to be corrected within one day, if an advance fee is requested
it was unanimously decided to return to the plaintiff on 15.01.2018.