Case For Collection Of a Delay Penalty Arising From The Relationship With The Work Contract

14 Mar Case For Collection Of a Delay Penalty Arising From The Relationship With The Work Contract

T.C. SUPREME

15.Legal Department
Basis: 2016/1046
Decision: 2016/3719
Decision Date: 28.06.2016

A CASE FOR COLLECTING A PENALTY FOR DELAY ARISING FROM THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE WORK CONTRACT – IT IS LEGALLY POSSIBLE FOR THE PLAINTIFF TO REQUEST INTEREST BY RECLAMATION – FAILURE TO REJECT THE INTEREST REQUEST WITH CONTRARY CONSIDERATIONS – CORRECTION AND APPROVAL OF THE PROVISION

Abstract: as for the concrete event, the plaintiff party, which does not claim interest at the beginning of the case, will be able to claim interest at the later stages, provided that it resorts to this path once until the investigation ends. For this reason, it should be considered legally possible and accepted for the claimant to claim interest in reclamation. On the contrary, the refusal of the interest request was not correct. Although the decision should therefore be overturned, since the removal of this fallacy does not require a retrial, the provision is provisional to HMK 3. 438/VII. it was found appropriate to be corrected and approved in accordance with the article.

(6100 P. K. m. 176, 181, 182)

Case and decision: the date and number of the above written provision was requested by the deputies of the parties to review the appeal and it was understood that the appeals were issued within the period of time, but the papers in the file were read and considered necessary:

The case is a case of collection of delay penalty arising from the relationship of the work contract. The plaintiff … owns the business, and the defendant is a contractor. The municipal attorney of the plaintiff the owner of the business, the company that owns the building between the plaintiff and the plaintiff of the defendant in accordance with the project contract was signed as a business center, and about the organization that is the question of the defendant’s failed to meet its commitments in accordance with the contract signed between them and delay, delay, stating that requested you will get the penalty must be paid, but the defendant company representative, the contractor, the plaintiff as a municipal building that was rented for the regulation of the business centre, he defended the dismissal of the case, stating that the contract covered the entire building and the case was unwarranted, as a result of the court’s decision to accept the case, the decision was appealed by the defendant’s attorney during the legal period.

1-according to the articles in the file, the evidence on which the decision is based, the necessary reasons in accordance with the law, and in particular, the lack of a hit in the evaluation of the evidence, other appeals that are outside the scope of the following bend of the parties have not been seen in place, the rejection was necessary.

2-the plaintiff has increased his demand by raising his request to try 88.150,00 with his petition for reclamation dated 19.09.2012,and has also requested interest on the entire price from the date of the case.

Correctional Institution No. 6100 HMK 176 to 182. it is arranged between substances. Reclamation is called a complete or partial correction of a procedural process performed by one of the parties (HMK 176/1). The case was settled by the plaintiff on the 180th anniversary of HMK. as can be fully reformed in accordance with Article 181 of the HMK by the parties. according to the article, it can also be partially rectified. All procedural procedures are considered to have not been carried out since the petition for the case to be fully reformed. Changing the part of the claim in the case is also a complete improvement of the case. In partial reclamation, the party reclaims a certain procedural process. Increasing the part of the demand in the case is part of the improvement of the case. Both deductive and partial reclamation of the case can be done until the end of the investigation (HMK 177/1) and once (HMK 176/2).

As for the concrete event in light of these explanations, the plaintiff party, which does not claim interest at the beginning of the case, will be able to claim interest at later stages, provided that it resorts to this path once until the end of the investigation. For this reason, it should be considered legally possible and accepted for the claimant to claim interest in reclamation. On the contrary, the refusal of the interest request was not correct.

Although the decision should therefore be overturned, since the removal of this fallacy does not require a retrial, the provision is provisional to HMK 3. 438/VII. it was found appropriate to be corrected and approved in accordance with the article.

Result: 1 Above. for the reasons described in Paragraph 2, The defendant’s rejection of other appeals.1 of the provision for the reasons described in paragraph. located in Bend, “…requested in the petition 1.000,00 TL, Correctional 87.150 requested by the petition,a total of TL 88.150 00,00 TL penalty to be given to the plaintiff from the defendant with the collection of receivables” removed from the decision of the sentence, “the petition request 1.000,00 TL, Correctional 87.150 requested by the petition,a total of TL 88.150 00,00 TL with legal interest from the date of the penalty receivables to process the case of the plaintiff from the defendant with the collection to be given to the phrase” approved by the decision of the decision to be added to the different shape of the corrected, it was unanimously decided on 28.06.2016 that the advance fees they paid should be returned to the appellant parties on request and that the decision could be requested for correction within 15 days from the date of notification against the decision.