SINCE THE COST OF PRODUCTION IS DESIRABLE AND THE AMOUNT IS DETERMINED BY THE TRIAL CONDUCTED AND THE EXPERT REPORT RECEIVED, EXECUTIVE DENIAL COMPENSATION CANNOT ALSO BE RULED ON

02 Dec SINCE THE COST OF PRODUCTION IS DESIRABLE AND THE AMOUNT IS DETERMINED BY THE TRIAL CONDUCTED AND THE EXPERT REPORT RECEIVED, EXECUTIVE DENIAL COMPENSATION CANNOT ALSO BE RULED ON

T.C SUPREME COURT 15.Department of Law, Base: 2018/ 2380 Decision: 2018 / 1912 Decision Date: 14.05.2018

SUMMARY: a subcontracting agreement between the parties dated 13.03.2012 arranged in accordance with the cost of the plaintiff in the construction of the work; according to the expert report received 52.580,00, identified as misses in the adoption of this portion of the plaintiff’s claim for a while there, the plaintiff’s punitive conditions and legal regulations in the face of the demand for the adoption contract has been partly true. The plaintiff is a subcontractor, the defendant is a contractor, and by the contract dated 13.03.2012, some of the works that the defendant has undertaken have been commissioned to the plaintiff. Dec 16 of the agreement between the parties. 15 of the contract concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant outside the case, although the criminal condition is agreed in Article 15 of the contract concluded between the defendant and the decedent. article: work subcontractor-a subcontractor is to be made through prohibited, and the plaintiff, by this provision in his contract with the contractor’s case from a business owner needs to know 2016/14-16, based on Decision No. dated 26.09.2016 our agency precedent, according to this provision between the business owner and the contractor, due to the performance of the contract between the parties does not have the ability to because you requested possible due to the lack of penalty (6098 of law 136, 177, 182. 1) while the request for a criminal condition must be rejected in full, its partial acceptance is not correct, as well as the cost of production is desirable and the amount is determined by the trial conducted and the expert report received, since it is not liquid, the executive denial compensation cannot be ruled on. It was not correct to make a decision contrary to the legal regulations and judicial practices described, and the decision had to be overturned for the benefit of the defendant.

(6098 P. K. m. 136, 177, 182)

Case: It was understood that the date and number written above were requested by the attorneys of the appellant for the examination of the written judgment and were granted within the period of the appeals petitions, the file returned to the scene due to the deficiency was replenished and arrived, but the papers in the file were read and considered as necessary:

The case, building the wrongful termination of the contract due to the cost of manufacturing, cost and penalty enforcement proceedings for the collection of the withdrawal of the appeal, the continuation of the pursuit, and to deny prompt is related to executive compensation by the court, the partial acceptance of the case for decision, the party was appealed by agents within the period.

1-According to the articles in the file, the evidence on which the decision is based, and the necessary reasons in accordance with the law, all the appeals of the plaintiff’s attorney and other appeals of the defendant’s attorney that fall outside the scope of the following paragraph were not considered in place, their rejection was required.

2-The client of the deputy plaintiff, which the defendant undertook with a tender from the General Directorate of Highways; … …(13+896,062 km) … bridge construction, earthworks, pavement construction machinery and labour structures, leveling, shipping, construction, manufacturing production that has taken part due to a landslide while a portion of the Directorate General of highways that are understood because of the lack of road safety and to determine the route that has stopped the construction of the new project, the new project according to the work of other contractors gave it to the defendant, where he did 52.580 corresponds to the cost of manufacture,00 TL and written in the contract 400.000,00 TL 2 for the collection of penalties. He requested the cancellation of the appeal against the follow-up made in the Execution Directorate’s file No. 2013/6731.

A claim cannot be made due to a contract that does not appear in the commercial records of the defendant’s proxy, which does not have legal validity, because; the contract concluded with the owner of the business, 15. in his article, he argued that there is a provision that the work subject to litigation cannot be subcontracted, that the amount of criminal conditions requested is excessive and contrary to equity, and that the case should be dismissed.

According to the subcontracting agreement dated 13.03.2012 concluded between the parties, the cost of the plaintiff’s work has been determined to be 52.580,00 according to the expert report received, and although there is no decency in accepting this part of the plaintiff’s claim, partial acceptance of the plaintiff’s claim for the criminal condition has not been correct in the face of the contract and legal regulations. The plaintiff is a subcontractor, the defendant is a contractor, and by the contract dated 13.03.2012, some of the works that the defendant has undertaken have been commissioned to the plaintiff. Dec 16 of the agreement between the parties. 15 of the contract concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant outside the case, although the criminal condition is agreed in Article 15 of the contract concluded between the defendant and the decedent. article: work subcontractor-a subcontractor is to be made through prohibited, and the plaintiff, by this provision in his contract with the contractor’s case from a business owner needs to know 2016/14-16, based on Decision No. dated 26.09.2016 our agency precedent, according to this provision between the business owner and the contractor, due to the performance of the contract between the parties does not have the ability to because you requested possible due to the lack of penalty (6098 of law 136, 177, 182. 1) while the request for a criminal condition must be rejected in full, its partial acceptance is not correct, as well as the cost of production is desirable and the amount is determined by the trial conducted and the expert report received, since it is not liquid, the executive denial compensation cannot be ruled on. It was not correct to make a decision contrary to the legal regulations and judicial practices described, and the decision had to be overturned for the benefit of the defendant.

Conclusion: The above 1. 2. Rejection of all and other clean objections of the plaintiff’s attorney for the reasons described in Jul. it was unanimously decided on 14.05.2018 that the decision could be overturned for the defendant’s benefit for the reasons described in the paragraph, the appeal fee of TL 6.70 written below was taken from the appellant, the appeal advance fee paid was returned to the appellant on request, the decision could be requested to correct the decision within 15 days from the date of notification against the decision. (¤¤)