If the purchase and sale of vehicles has not been made within the scope of their commercial or professional activities, the general courts are responsible for the entente that will arise in such a sale..
In the following Supreme Court Decisionit has been decided that the defendants have not taken up the profession of selling vehicles, in this context, the defendants are not sellers as defined in the law, and the relationship between the parties is understood to be outside the scope of the Law No. 6502, so the Consumer Court, not the General courts, is responsible for hearing the case.
13.Department of Law 2017/2916 E. , 2017/3730 K.
“text of jurisprudence”
COURT : Court of First Instance (in the capacity of Consumer Court)
At the end of the trial of the receivable case between the parties, the file was examined upon appeal by the defendants’ lawyer within the period of the judgment given for partial acceptance and partial rejection of the case for the reasons written in the decision, and the case was Deciphered and considered as necessary.
decision
The plaintiff, the defendant …’s owner of the car that the other defendant sold to him at a notary public with a power of attorney, it is understood that the vehicle has a pert total registration, the vehicle is a hidden defect, claiming that the cancellation of the contract, the price he paid 24.300 TL with interest requested to be decided to collect.
The defendants have requested that the case be dismissed.
The court has decided to partially accept the case, and the verdict has been appealed by one of the defendants.
The Purpose of the Law No. 1-6502 on Consumer Protection is entitled 1. after the purpose of the law is explained in Article 2 of the scope title. in its article, “This law covers all kinds of consumer transactions and consumer-oriented applications.” the judgment is given. 3 Of the Law. in the article, goods; refers to movable property that is subject to shopping, immovable property for residential and holiday purposes, and software, audio, video and similar intangible goods prepared for use in electronic media. Seller; it covers natural or legal persons who offer goods to the consumer within the scope of their commercial or professional activities, including public legal entities. The consumer, on the other hand, is defined as a natural or legal person who acquires, uses or benefits from a good or service for commercial or non-professional purposes. Again, in Article 3 / d of the aforementioned law, “service; It is defined as any kind of activity other than providing goods made in exchange for a fee or benefit”.
In order for a legal transaction to be recognized as remaining within the scope of law No. 6502, there must be a legal transaction related to the sale of goods and services between the parties Deciphered above within the purpose of the law. 73 of the law No. 6502. the article stipulated that all kinds of disputes related to the implementation of this law will be dealt with in consumer courts. When the concrete incident is evaluated, it is understood that the defendants have not Decisioned the sale of vehicles, in this context, the defendants are not sellers as defined in the law and the relationship between the parties is outside the scope of the Law No. 6502. In this case, the General courts, not the Consumer Court, are responsible for hearing the case. The regulations related to the duty are related to public order and are observed ex officio at every stage of the proceedings, even if the parties do not put forward. There is no vested right in matters related to duty. In that case, while the court should decide the case by considering the case as a general court, the establishment of a judgment as a consumer court is contrary to the procedure and the law and is the reason for overturning it.
2-According to the reason for the violation, there is no need to examine the defendant’s appeal objections for now.
CONCLUSION: Due to the reasons explained in the first paragraph, the appealed decision was OVERTURNED, due to the reasons explained in the second paragraph, there is no place for examining the defendant’s appeals, the refund of the advance fee on request was decided unanimously on the day of 23/03/2017, in accordance with Article 440/1 of the HUMK, within 15 days from the date of the notification, so that the way to correct the decision is open.
20.Legal Department 2016/3155 E. , 2016/5362 K.
“text of jurisprudence”
COURT : Consumer Court
In the case between the parties, Ankara Dec. 14. Law of First Instance and Ankara 9. All the documents in the file sent to determine the place of jurisdiction due to the decision of dismissal by the Consumer Courts separately were examined and considered as necessary:
decision
The case is related to the claim for material and moral compensation arising from the sale of defective goods.
Ankara 14. In the Civil Court of First Instance, a decision of dismissal was given on the grounds that the transaction subject to the case is a consumer transaction.
Ankara 9. The Consumer Court, on the other hand, made a decision of dismissal on the grounds that the dispute does not fall within the scope of Law No. 6502 because the defendant did not act for commercial or professional purposes.
2 of the Law No. 6502 on Consumer Protection, which entered into force on 28.05.2014. in accordance with Article “All kinds of consumer transactions and consumer-oriented applications” are covered by this Law. 73/1 of the law. in accordance with the Article, consumer courts are responsible for cases related to disputes arising from the scope of this law.
Law No. 6502 3/1-(i) the seller of the item in the “for commercial or professional purposes providing goods or services to consumers provide or acting for the account in the name of” the natural or legal person; the consumer in the process, “acting for commercial or professional purposes or market goods or services with the people who act on her behalf and any contract between consumers and the legal process has been described as”.
For these reasons, the relationship that a consumer purchases goods or services under the law to be accepted, the vendor/provider is the person “who act for commercial or professional purposes” is a person, the person who receives the goods or services for business purposes or commercial move “who doesn’t” be a person between the parties contractual or legal process is required.
In a concrete case, even though there are purchase and sale agreement forms between the parties, the defendant, the person selling second-hand vehicle, whether it is for commercial or professional purposes of Law No. 6502 does not move 3/1-(i) in the meaning of Article “vendor” is not having the title; also the relationship between the two “consumer process” is not. For these reasons, the dispute must be resolved in a court of first instance in accordance with the general provisions.
CONCLUSION: For the reasons described above, 21 and 22 of HMK No. 6100. in accordance with articles Ankara 14. It was unanimously decided on 11/05/2016 to DESIGNATE the Court of First Instance AS the PLACE of JURISDICTION.
You can read our articles and petition examples by clicking here.