General Archives - Page 17 of 163 - AŞIKOĞLU LAW OFFİCE
Aşıkoğlu started his position as the Alanya Public Prosecutor in 2009 and continued until 2013 when he quit his position to initiate his career as an attorney at law.
alanya,hukuk,bürosu,avukat,dava,danışma,mehmet,aşıkoğlu,mehmet aşıkoğlu,savcı,eski,ceza,ticaret,haciz,alacak,borçlar,Mehemet,Aşıkoğlu,alanya,avukat,hukuk,bürosu,alanya avukat, mehmet aşıkoğlu, alanya hukuk bürosu,Kerim Uysal,Kerem Yağdır,ahmet sezer, mustafa demir, hüsnü sert, jale karakaya, murat aydemir, ayşegül yanmaz
1
archive,paged,category,category-genel,category-1,paged-17,category-paged-17,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,side_area_uncovered_from_content,qode-theme-ver-14.2,qode-theme-bridge,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-6.13.0,vc_responsive
T.C. Supreme Court 23. Law Department Base No:2015/4182, Decision No:2016/1018, K. Date:22.2.2016
At the end of the trial of the complaint on the order line between the parties, complaints are made within the period of the provision issued for the acceptance of the complaint for reasons...
T.C. SUPREME COURT 23. DEPARTMENT OF LAW E. 2013/8006, K. 2014/832, T. 6.2.2014
CASE: At the end of the trial of the case of appeal against the order line between the parties, the case was examined by the defendant's attorney within the period of the decision...
If the creditor who has an objection to the order table does not claim that the transaction has been incorrectly applied not only to the rules of follow-up law, but also to the creditor who has been placed on the order table, or objects to...
T.C THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
4.law office
Base: 2016/ 13193
Decision: 2019/39
Date of Decision: 14.01.2019
...
T.C THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
14.Criminal Department
Base: 2015/ 6298
Decision: 2018 / 7135
Date of Decision: 03.12.2018
The provisions issued by the court of first instance were appealed and the file was examined and considered as necessary:
In the examination of the provision established on the defendant for...
T.C THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
6.Criminal Department
Base: 2018/ 3052
Decision: 2018 / 7548
Date of Decision: 04.12.2018
Case: Kayseri 1. On 26.02.2018 day, 2017/825 Basis and 2018/102 Decision of the Heavy Criminal Court and against the conviction for looting, the defendant ...
T.C. THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
2. law office
E. 2014/16139
K. 2015/498
T. 15.1.2015
• SUBMISSION OF EVIDENCE FROM THE PARTIES CANNOT BE EXPECTED WITHOUT A PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION HEARING (IF THE COURT GIVES THE PARTIES THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT EVIDENCE AND SHOWS THAT THEIR WITNESSES SHOULD BE HEARD...
T.C. THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
19. law office
E. 2015/16385
K. 2016/287
T. 19.1.2016
• NOTIFICATION IF IT IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THE ADDRESS OF THE ADDRESSEE (Notification of Arbitrariness is Possible to the Person to Be Notified, If One of the Neighbors Is Notified, the Manager or...
T.C THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF LAW
E. 2017/2-1287
K. 2019/90
T. 7.2.2019
* DIVORCE REQUEST BASED ON THE REASON FOR THE SHAKING OF THE MARRIAGE UNION ( The Lawyer has No Written Confirmation of the Notification of the Reasoned Decision to the Trainee Lawyer, and...
T.C. THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
12. law office
Base. 2016/2889
Decision. 2016/5851
T. 1.3.2016
• REQUEST CANCELLATION OF THE FOLLOW-UP
(It is Not Possible to Follow–Up by Sending an Executive Order by Cashing the Mortgage to the Owner of the Mortgage, Complaining That There is No Notification of a...
