T.C.
SUPREME
law office
2012/13948
2013/2247
21.2.2013
ADULTHOOD (A Minor Who Has Reached the Age of 15 Can be Made an Adult by the Court at His Own Request and with the Consent of His Guardian – If the Minor’s Request in This Regard is Registered and His Request is Positive, the Case Will be Accepted)
DECLARATİON of MATURİTY REQUEST TO MAKE A DECISION (A Minor Who Has Reached the Age of 15 Can Be Made an Adult by the Court at His Own Request and with the Consent of His Guardian – His Parents Have Informed Him That They Have Given Permission With Signed Statements Received at the Hearing / If the Minor’s Request in This Regard is Positive, It Will be Accepted)
A MINOR WHO HAS REACHED THE AGE OF FIFTEEN (He Can Be Made an Adult by the Court at His Own Request and with the Consent of His Parent / There are No Signs of Bodily Mental Illness With a Forensic Medical Report – The Parents Have Allowed the Parents to Make an Declaration of Maturity/ The Minor’s Request Will be Decided by Taking Custody)
4721/m.12
SUMMARY : The case is about becoming an adult. A minor who has reached the age of fifteen can be made an adult by the court at his own request and with the consent of his guardian. In the report of the Forensic Medical Institution, the minor’s request for an accidental bribe with the signed statements of the parents received at the hearing, in which the minor is still within the age of 15, there are no signs or symptoms of a physical, mental illness, no signs of mental retardation, his psychological development is compatible with his age, the minor’s request for this matter must be made in custody, if his request is positive, in the face of the notification that they have allowed the decision to be made.
CASE: In the case petition, declaration of maturity was asked to make a decision. The court decided to dismiss the case, and the decision was appealed by the deputy plaintiffs.
After it became clear that the appeal request was within the time limit, all the papers in the file were read and considered as necessary:
VERDICT : The deputy plaintiff filed a petition for the case, U., born 01.10.1996.he is currently 11th. he is a class student and wants to participate in the KPSS exam of 2012, as a condition of taking the exam, a decision is required that he is underage before the exam date, so he asked to be decided that U is underage on the date before 23.09.2012, and the court decided to reject the request.
The case is about becoming an adult.
12 Of the Turkish Civil Code. according to the article, a minor who has reached the age of fifteen can be made an adult by the court at his own request and with the consent of his guardian.
19.09.2012 2012/23084 numbered file in the current day report of the Directorate of Forensic Medicine Institution, U. physics and because of its spiritual origin, born in 1996, is developed according to the population register, is still not completed the age of 16 the age of 15, a physical, a mental illness signs or symptoms are not signs of mental retardation had been found that the psychological development when it was reported to be compatible with the age of the parents at the hearing the mother and father received a signed declaration to inform decision that allowed the provision of incidental rust across small U by entering into a memorandum of request in this topic, if his request is positive, the decision should be made to accept the case, but his refusal was not considered correct on the grounds that it was not in place.
CONCLUSION: As of this moment, the provision in writing is invalid, without taking into account the principles described above, and appeals are in place for these reasons, so the decision is made with acceptance.nin428. in accordance with the article ( ON ITS DETERIORATION ), the refund of the down payment of the appeal to the appellant upon request was decided unanimously on 21.02.2013.
T.C.
SUPREME
2. law office
E. 2004/14068
K. 2004/15983
T. 29.12.2004
• MAKING THE PERSON UNDER GUARDIANSHIP AN ADULT (AFTER THE PERMISSION OF THE GUARDIANSHIP AUTHORITY, THE PERMISSION OF THE SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY IS ALSO REQUIRED)
* BECOMING AN ADULT (AFTER THE PERMISSION OF THE PERSON UNDER GUARDIANSHIP – THE GUARDIANSHIP AUTHORITY, THE PERMISSION OF THE SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY IS ALSO REQUIRED)
• AS REQUIRED BY THE PERMISSION OF THE SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY (AFTER THE PERMISSION OF THE GUARDIANSHIP AUTHORITY – MAKING THE PERSON UNDER GUARDIANSHIP AN ADULT )
4721/m.12,463
ABSTRACT : TMK No. 4721.nun12. according to the provisions of the article, a minor who has reached the age of fifteen can be made an adult by the court at his own request and with the consent of his guardian.
463 of the same law. in the article, after the permission of the guardianship authority, the cases where the permission of the supervisory authority is required are regulated and the case of Decertification of the person under guardianship is also considered among them. Accordingly, it is against the procedure and the law to decide whether to make a minor an adult without obtaining permission from the guardianship and supervision authorities.
CASE: At the end of the trial, the decision of the local court was overturned for the benefit of the law Upon the request of the Ministry of Justice by the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Supreme Court, the documents were read and discussed and considered as necessary:
DECISION : It is understood that the case filed by plaintiff Ersin Yirik on 28.9.2002 as a non-adversary with the request to be made a minor has been decided by the court and the decision has been finalized without appeal.
12 Of the Turkish Civil Code No. 4721. according to the provisions of the article, a minor who has reached the age of fifteen can be made an adult by the court at his own request and with the consent of his guardian.
463 of the Same Law. in the article, after the permission of the guardianship authority, the cases where the permission of the supervisory authority is required are regulated and the case of Decertification of the person under guardianship is also counted among them.
It is contrary to the procedure and the law that the court decides to make the minor an adult without obtaining permission from the guardianship and supervision authorities.
CONCLUSION : 427/6 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Supreme Court. it was unanimously decided on 29.12.2004 that the provision would be OVERTURNED so as not to affect the outcome with the acceptance of the request to amend it for the benefit of the law based on the article for the announced reason.
T.C.
SUPREME
2. law office
E. 2004/1635
K. 2004/2614
T. 3.3.2004
• BECOMING AN ADULT (A MINOR WHO HAS REACHED THE AGE OF 15 – BY HIS OWN WILL AND BY THE PERMISSION OF HIS PARENTS / THE REQUEST OF ONE OF THE SPOUSES IS NOT ENOUGH)
• MAKING A MINOR AN ADULT (WHO HAS REACHED THE AGE OF 15 – BY HIS OWN WILL AND BY THE PERMISSION OF HIS PARENTS / THE REQUEST OF ONE OF THE SPOUSES IS NOT ENOUGH)
• THE NEED FOR PARENTS TO USE CUSTODY TOGETHER (MAKING A MINOR OVER THE AGE OF 15 AN ADULT – THE REQUEST OF ONE OF THE SPOUSES IS NOT ENOUGH)
* CUSTODY (MAKING A MINOR OVER THE AGE OF 15 AN ADULT / THE NEED FOR PARENTS TO USE IT TOGETHER – THE REQUEST OF ONE OF THE SPOUSES IS NOT ENOUGH)
4721/m.12, 336, 342
SUMMARY: A minor who has reached the age of fifteen can be made an adult by the court at his own request and with the consent of his parent.
The plaintiff’s spouse from the population registration sample available in the file …….it is understood that he is alive.
The court gives the plaintiff time to notify the execution of his spouse by participating in the case or being present for the hearing, or to submit a notarized document with a signature indicating the execution, and this should be decided according to the result, while it is against the procedure and the law to establish a provision by finding the request of one of the spouses sufficient.
CASE: At the end of the trial between the parties, the Deconstruction of the decision made by the local court for the benefit of the law was requested by the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Supreme Court upon the request of the Ministry of Justice, the documents were read and discussed and considered as necessary:
VERDICT : In the lawsuit filed by the plaintiff with the petition dated 11.02.2002, the son born on 01.10.1984, who is under custody …………’ it is understood that he wanted to be made a minor, the minor’s mother’s participation in the case was not ensured, the court decided to accept the case and the decision was finalized without appeal.
12 Of the Turkish Civil Code No. 4721. according to the article, a minor who has reached the age of fifteen can be made an adult by the court at his own request and with the consent of his guardian.
336 of the Same Law. in the article “As long as the marriage continues, the parents use custody together.” the provision is available. According to the provision of this article, priority or superiority has not been granted to any of the spouses. 342. in the article, the principle is also introduced that parents will represent the child within the framework of their custody without distinction.
These mandatory provisions apply to all cases to be filed by the parents on behalf of the child within the scope of the use of custody within the marriage union. Accordingly, the main thing is that the spouses file a lawsuit together, but it is enough that the lawsuit to be filed by one of them will be established together by the fact that the other spouse subsequently notifies of his execution and reveals his positive will, as custody will be established together. The refusal of the case in which the participation or consent of the other spouse cannot be provided is required.
The spouse of the plaintiff from the population registration sample present in the examined file …………’ it is understood that he is alive.
The court gives the plaintiff time to notify the execution of his spouse by participating in the case or being present for the hearing, or to submit a notarized document with a signature indicating the execution, and this should be decided according to the result, while it is against the procedure and the law to establish a provision by finding the request of one of the spouses sufficient.
CONCLUSION : 427/6 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Supreme Court. it was unanimously decided on 03.03.2004 that the provision would be OVERTURNED so as not to affect the outcome with the acceptance of the request to amend it for the benefit of the law based on the article for the announced reason.
You can read our articles and petition examples by clicking here.