THE CONTRACT IS MADE AS A GUARANTEE OF THE TRANSPORT ACT.
ALTHOUGH THE LETTER OF GUARANTEE IS NOT RETURNED
REQUEST TO BE GIVEN-STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS NOT TO PUT FORWARD THE BURIAL
Need
Summary: The Carriage is not returned, although the contract has been performed, as collateral for the act.
statute of limitations in the lawsuit filed by the carrier against the vehicle regarding the return of the letter of guarantee found
it is decided not to put forward defi.
(6762 P. K. m. 767)
Case: provided as a guarantee of the Transport Act and not returned even though the contract has been performed
in the case against the return of the letter of guarantee put forward by the commuters
767 of the Turkish Commercial Code due to statute of limitations. and 889 of the old Commercial Code. article
conflict of case law between the two decrees of the chamber as to whether the exercise could be possible
settlement of the dispute by combining the case law by mentioning its existence, Department of Commerce of the Supreme Court of Appeals
The case law of the Supreme Court, which was convened upon the request of the presidency with the article dated 26.9.1966 and numbered 66/266
Merger Law Section discussed the situation at the General Assembly:
Decision: the court of Cassation of Commerce office 21.11.1952 day and 6156/5132 no.
it is related to the provision in the way of dismissal due to the timeliness of his case and in this decree;
acceptance by the parties that the transfer agreement provision ended on 31.7.1943 and this case 13.3.1950
it was substituted on the 889 of the Commercial Code. article of the contract of transport
fidellit bilumum is written that legal cases will be invalid after one year and the return of the guarantee
request to be found in the mentioned transport contract from the creditors and transfer fee
the request for the rest of the amount deducted from the claimant on 10.5.1945 with the declaration that he was overpaid is the same
with the rejection of the plaintiff’s improper appeals, the provision is subject to the ruling.
approved) it is decided, and the same date on the subject like the apartment 16.11.1965, E. 63/617165/95
(case, the plaintiff shipper committed against the defendant vehicle because of the work of transport
and the withdrawal of the letter of guarantee to the defendant in order to carry out this carriage
it’s his case. Acceptance of letters of guarantee as a detail of the articles of association and subject to the articles of association
the application of the statute of limitations on which the letter of guarantee and the institutions of surety shall be
it doesn’t suit its purpose or nature. The case is a request that would countenance the same letter of guarantee.
the plaintiff shipper could give the defendant a mortgage as collateral or show a personal surety. In this case,
and, if the same principle is adopted, such as a one-year statute of limitations or a personal bail.
it is necessary to reach a conclusion that is not feasible to implement, in this case, the guarantee establishment
it’s incompatible with purpose and purpose. It was decided that the provision would be impaired for the benefit of the plaintiff), and
thus, a unanimous decision on the existence of a case law violation and the consolidation of this violation
after it has been given, the basis has been passed on.
1) in contracts containing commitments, one of the Contracting Parties shall, on multiple occasions, fulfill the obligation of the other contracting party.
the bank is requesting a valid bank guarantee and such undertaking documents issued by the banks are called a letter of guarantee. Bank guarantee letters in one respect
the act of the third party is committed and is always regulated in writing. In this letter
usually the highest amount the bank will be responsible for is shown in the figure. Adjective of the bank,
since it is the provider of the guarantee, its commitment is separate from the parties making the principal contract and the principal contract, and
is completely autonomous. The bank’s commitment depends on the validity and asset of the beneficiary’s debt
without warranty as a commitment. The bank has a contract with this letter of guarantee
for the person who receives the guarantee if he or she does not fulfill the obligation of the connected person.
it takes on all or part the dangers that arise.
A person is not satisfied with the debt, regardless of the objections that the principal debtor may put forward
if he accepts compensation for the damage caused, he is the guarantor. The verb of the third person
the person who guarantees, that is, the person who promises someone else that this person will do something, has a separate commitment.
in the event that it has entered, and that it is not fulfilled, the damage and loss of positive and reciprocated nature.
he has to be teased. The difference between the Guarantee Act and the bail; the guarantor’s debt has a certain nature, that is, the principal debt.
where there is an additional second-degree commitment, the guarantor shall give compensation if the debt is not repaid
not the actual execution of the commitment that is required by the debtor, that is, the payment of the debt even though he has taken on;
the debt of the guarantor is that it has a detached nature, not a ferment. The guarantor, the principal
it is not responsible for the performance of the commitment, but for the payment of damages and losses.
The bank that issued the letter of guarantee is the debtor of this actin and the recipient of the guarantee because a debt is loaded
he’s a creditor. The third party which is committed to fulfilling the provisions of the convention
the individual is not a party to this warranty agreement. In order for this warranty to be valid,
it is sufficient to think that it can be done by a third party. Guaranteed result
this commitment will be eliminated if it happens.
2) in cases where the case law is contradictory, the carrier will fulfill the requirements of the contract of carriage
the subject of the letter of guarantee given by the bank is under guarantee in favor of the commuters, the transport has been transferred
performed, guaranteed acts have been realized, although the letter of guarantee must be returned
since it was not given, a lawsuit has been filed against the return of this letter. Vehicle statute of limitations in the case
burial were found. Issue to be resolved; does not return the letter of guarantee to the carrier
the defendant vehicle of the Turkish Commercial Code 767 and removed 865 of the Commercial Code No. 889.
on the basis of the articles of statute of limitations on whether burial shall be carried out and on such a matter
it is being collected on whether the said statute of limitations can be applied.
The parties to the contract of carriage (the carrier) and (the carrier); the guarantee pledged by the letter of guarantee
the parties of actin are (the vehicle) and (the Bank). Its de facto committed carrier, its bank
due to his treatment he entered into an agreement with the bank on this matter and in accordance with that agreement
the commission has paid and shown a counter guarantee. At the end of the execution of the Transport Act, I take this letter to the bank
he’ll return it, get rid of his obligations to her. These situations include the delivery of the bank’s letter of guarantee to the vehicle and the bank’s commitment to the carrier’s action,
the Transport shows that actin is outside and completely separate from it. Letter of guarantee
neither the carrier nor the carrier of this act is the actual act of receiving and giving the letter to the carrier from the bank.
the request for return by the event does not give the character of moving forward. Return of the guarantee deed in this respect
767 of the Turkish Commercial Code. and 889 of the amended Commercial Code.
the timeouts shown in its articles cannot be applied.
3) upon payment of the debt, the debtor has the right to request the return or cancellation of the deed.
The situation is the same even if the guaranteed result has been compromised. Warranty area,
to the bank that issued the letter of commitment or to the person who is actually committed to be returned to it.
he has to return it. The case against the non-return of this letter is not a claim case but a claim.
it is a case of the return of the document or the cancellation of the document as it has lost its provisions. Such a
there can be no difference between the extradition provision and the annulment provision in the case. I mean, he’s holding this document in his hand.
the guarantor may defend by declaration that the Committed Act is not fully fulfilled.
The party holding a document that is requested to be refunded or cancelled by betting because its contents are not valid
as long as the plaintiff has the legal benefit of requesting that document back in the case against him.
the statute of limitations cannot be challenged. In fact, the judge’s decision to return or cancel that document will be replaced by
there can be no statute of limitations since the document has no material value.
Conclusion: the carriage was given as a guarantee of the act and was not returned even though the contract was fulfilled
in the case filed by the carrier against the vehicle about the return of the letter of guarantee found, the vehicle
by the Turkish Commercial Code 767. statute of limitations defi forward by relying on the clause
it is possible to apply the said substance in the face of such a defi.
it was decided on 13.12.1967 by unanimous decision in the first meeting and vote that he was not present.