INFORMATION Archives - Page 62 of 83 - 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
211
archive,paged,category,category-information,category-211,paged-62,category-paged-62,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
8.law office
Base: 2016/10162
Decision: 2016/10473
Date of Decision: 14.06.2016
THE CASE ARISING FROM FORECLOSURE – THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY OR RIGHT THAT THE DECISION OF THE EXECUTIVE COURT JUL WILL NOT EXCEED THE SPECIFIED AMOUNT IN ORDER TO CONDUCT AN APPEAL REVIEW – THE VALUE...
T.C. SUPREME COURT
8.law office
Base: 2016/9792
Decision: 2016/10477
Date of Decision: 14.06.2016
THE CASE OF THE RATION - WHERE THE VALUE OF THE VICTIMS SUBJECT TO APPEAL IS BELOW THE LEGAL LIMIT – REJECTION OF THE APPEAL PETITION
ABSTRACT: In the concrete case, the value of the victims who are...
T.C. SUPREME COURT
8.law office
Base: 2016/9690
Decision: 2016/10437
Date of Decision: 14.06.2016
FORTIFICATION CASE – THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY OR RIGHT HELD BY THE DECISION OF THE EXECUTIVE COURT EXCEEDS THE ESTABLISHED AMOUNT IN ORDER FOR THE FOLLOW–UP OF FORTIFICATION CASES TO BE REVIEWED ON...
T.C. SUPREME COURT
4.law office
Base: 2016/3774
Decision: 2016/7793
Date of Decision: 13.06.2016
COMPENSATION CASE – IT IS NECESSARY TO DETERMINE THE START DATE OF THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS AS OF THE DATE OF THE PLAINTIFF'S LOSS – THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS HAS EXPIRED – IT IS NECESSARY TO DECIDE...
T.C. SUPREME COURT
8.law office
Base : 2014/21867
Decision: 2016/10043
Date of Decision: 08.06.2016
FORTIFICATION CASE – WHERE THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY OR RIGHT CARRIED OUT BY THE DECISION OF THE EXECUTIVE COURT IS REQUIRED TO EXCEED THE SPECIFIED AMOUNT – APPROVAL OF THE PROVISION
ABSTRACT: In order to conduct...
T.C. SUPREME COURT
1.law office
Base: 2014/16696
Decision: 2016/5804
Date of Decision: 10.09.2016
CASE OF CANCELLATION AND REGISTRATION OF TITLE DEEDS – THERE IS NO INACCURACY IN THE DISCRETION OF THE EVIDENCE ON THE LEGAL AND JURIDICAL GROUNDS ON WHICH THE PROVISION IS BASED – APPROVAL OF THE PROVISION
ABSTRACT: In...
T.C. SUPREME COURT
8.Criminal Department
Base: 2016/6199
Decision: 2016/8684
Date of Decision: 30.06.2016
CRIME OF MISUSE OF CREDIT CARDS – A STATEMENT OF THE CREDIT CARD'S ACCOUNT MUST BE BROUGHT AND DETERMINED WHETHER IT WAS USED ON THE DATE OF THE INCIDENT AND A PROVISION MUST BE MADE ACCORDING TO...
T.C. SUPREME COURT
8.Criminal Department
Base: 2016/7247
Decision: 2016/8702
Date of Decision: 30.06.2016
CRIME OF ARMS TRADE – IT WAS FOUND THAT PISTOL PICTURES WERE SENT FROM THE DEFENDANT'S PHONE TO THE PHONE NUMBER IN QUESTION, THIS ISSUE WAS NOT INVESTIGATED – VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION
SUMMARY: During the examination of...
T.C. SUPREME COURT
15.law office
Main: 2016/891
Decision: 2016/3775
Date of Decision: 30.06.2016
THE CASE ARISING FROM THE WORK CONTRACT – AN ADDITIONAL REPORT SUITABLE FOR SENTENCING AND SUPREME COURT SUPERVISION IS RECEIVED AND THE RESULT IS DECIDED ACCORDINGLY – THE DECISION IS MADE BY INCOMPLETE EXAMINATION –
SUMMARY: a commission...
In the Turkish Penal Code, “counterfeit Money”, “don't be the cause of commotion”, “endanger Traffic Safety”, “Right where” rape, “on the general purpose is endangering security”, “official document making false statements in the regulation of”, “or the use of identity credentials belonging to someone else”...
