SUPREME COURT 15. Law Office
E. 2018/2122
2018/1173 K.
As a result of the appeal filed against the decision of the District Court of First Instance dated 29.06.2017 and numbered 2016/486-2017/204 of the case between plaintiffs 1-… 2-… defendant …… and deceased … Plaintiffs 1-… 2-… The Civil Court of First Instance, the decision of rejection by the defendant attorney was requested to be examined by the Supreme Court after the appeal filed by the Civil Chamber was not filed within the time limit, and the document in the file was read and deemed necessary by the Court of Cassation. As a result of the appeal filed against the decision of the District Court of First Instance dated 29.06.2017 and numbered 2016/486-2017/204 Dec.:
– THE DECISION –
The decision made by the court of first instance was notified to the defendant on 17.07.2017 and the application for appeal was also submitted 08.09.2017. In cases and affairs subject to judicial leave, if the expiration of the periods determined by this Law coincides with the holiday period, these periods shall also be deemed to have extended by one week from the day of the end of the judicial holiday without the need to take a decision.
(HMK 104/1) If the period is determined as a week, month or year, the day it starts ends at the holiday time of the corresponding day of the last week, month or year. (HMK 92/2) HMK 104. September September August August 31, the day of the end of the judicial year, is not from September 1, when the new judicial year begins, but since the article stipulates that the period will be considered extended by one week from the holiday day, it is necessary to calculate the week from August 31, when the judicial year ends. Thursday September Thursday September Thursday is the last day of the judicial holiday because the last day of the extended period coincides with Thursday 7 is the date of September 2018.
There is also an opinion in the teaching that the one-week period will be calculated from the day the holiday ends, and the last day of the extended period is September 7th. (Prof. Dr. L. Dr. Şanal Görgün/Asst. Assoc. Dr. Levent Bör/Asst. Assoc. Dr. Peace Toraman/Dr. Mehmet Kodakoglu-Law of Civil Procedure 6. edition sf. 215 Qualification 2017) There are also decisions in the applications to the Court of Cassation that are accepted that the last day of the term is September 7. (Example: 2. HD. 2016/365 e. 2017/654 K. 3. HD. 2015/15249 E 2015/16810 K, 4. HD. 2015/14837 E. 2017/5939 K, 15. HD. 2016/6210 E. 2016/5175 K, 11. HD. 2015/11749 E 2016/8966 K, 14. HD. 2016/5439 E 2016/9213 K, 19. HD. 2015/17494 E 2016 7567 K)
The deadline for applying for an appeal against the decision of the court of first instance is HMK 345. According to the article, it is two weeks from the date of notification, and after the expiration of this period, an application for appeal has been filed. Without a decision being made by the court of first instance on whether the application for appeal is within the time limit, it was decided to reject the application for appeal within the time limit given by the civil department of the regional court of justice where the file was sent due to the fact that it is not within the time limit of the application for appeal.
If the application for appeal has not been filed within the time limit, the court that makes the decision shall issue the provision of CCP 346/1. according to the article, it is necessary to decide on the rejection of the application for appeal. If the file has been sent to the regional court of justice without such a decision, in accordance with the decision on the consolidation of case law No. 1989/31 dated 01.06.1990 and 1990/4 dated 01.06.1990, the legal department of the regional court of justice may also decide to reject the application for appeal filed by the regional court of justice without the need to transfer the file to the regional court of justice.
Although the decision to combine these case-laws was made due to the provisions of the CCP, similar regulations in the CCP should also be applied in terms of appeal and appeal according to the provisions of the CCP, since they require the same interpretation and result.
In accordance with the articles contained in the file, the evidence on which the decision is based and the mandatory reasons according to the law, the rejection of all appeals that constitute a violation of procedure and HMK 370. it was unanimously decided to approve it in accordance with the provision in accordance with the article, to send the file to the court of first instance taking into account the provision of the article, and to send an example from the decision to the Civil Department of the District Court of Justice, to be finalized on 27.03.2018.