Supreme Court Of The Republic Of Turkey<\/p>\n
15.Legal Department
\nBasis: 2016\/3094
\nDecision: 2016\/3597
\nDecision Date: 21.06.2016<\/p>\n
A CASE FOR THE CANCELLATION OF THE APPEAL \u2013 IN WHICH BOTH PARTIES ARE MERCHANTS AND RELATE TO THE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE OF THE PARTIES \u2013 VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION<\/p>\n
Abstract: in a concrete dispute, the plaintiff is a sub-contractor, and the defendant is a contractor (provider). Although in this case the dispute arises from the work contract, the dispute between the parties does not fall under the Consumer Law. On the other hand, it should also be examined whether the Commercial Court of first instance is in charge. Attorney for the plaintiff, the defendant in the appeal.. It is understood that both parties are merchants and are related to the commercial enterprise of the parties. In this case, the court examined the merits of the work and collected the party’s evidence and decided according to the result, while otherwise the decision on non-duty was not correct, the decision was found to be appropriate.<\/p>\n
(6502 P. K. m. 1, 73)<\/p>\n
Case: the appeal examination of the above date and number of the written provision was requested by the plaintiff’s attorney and it was understood that the appeal was given within the time period, but the papers in the file were read and considered the need to speak and think:<\/p>\n
The dispute arises from the work contract, and the plaintiff sub-contractor asked the defendant contractor to cancel the appeal against the pursuit with a request for collection of unpaid work costs, the court decided that the case \u201cremained within the scope of law 6502, the decision was appealed by the plaintiff’s deputy.<\/p>\n
1, entitled The purpose of the law on consumer protection No. 6502, which was in force at the time of the case. “the purpose of this law is to take measures that protect the health and safety and economic interests of the consumer in accordance with the public interest, compensate for their losses, protect them from environmental hazards, enlighten and raise awareness of the consumer, encourage the initiatives of consumers themselves and encourage their voluntary organization in the creation of policies on these issues. Definition titled 3. (1) provider; public entities, including for commercial or professional purposes or provide services to consumers on behalf of the natural or legal persons who act on your behalf or service, (K) consumer, business -, or non-natural or legal persons who act for professional purposes, (L) consumer process; in markets for goods or services, including public entities, commercial or professional purposes, or acting for or on behalf established between natural or legal persons who act on her behalf and consumers, work, transportation, brokerage, insurance, attorneys, banking and similar contracts of all kinds, including contractual and legal process.”there are regulations. In order for a legal transaction to be considered a consumer transaction, it must comply with the above-mentioned definitions. In order for it to be understood that the relationship to the work contract also remains within the scope of the law on consumer protection, when the issues described are taken into account, one of the parties must be a consumer and the other must be a vendor provider. If these conditions are found, it can be said that the Consumer process and ultimately the court in charge is a \u201cconsumer court\u201d.<\/p>\n
The matter of duty is related to public order and must be taken into account by the court at every stage of the trial, and the right vested in the matter of duty cannot be in question. 73\/1 of Act No. 6502. in accordance with the article, consumer courts are responsible for disputes counted under this law, otherwise general courts are responsible.<\/p>\n
In a concrete dispute, the plaintiff is a sub-contractor, and the defendant is a contractor (provider). Although in this case the dispute arises from the work contract, the dispute between the parties does not fall under the Consumer Law. On the other hand, it should also be examined whether the Commercial Court of first instance is in charge. Attorney for the plaintiff, the defendant in the appeal.. It is understood that both parties are merchants and are related to the commercial enterprise of the parties. In this case, the court examined the merits of the work and collected the party’s evidence and decided according to the result, while the decision on non-duty in writing was not correct, the decision was found appropriate.<\/p>\n
Conclusion: it was decided unanimously on 21.06.2016 to overturn the appellate provision for the reasons described above, to return the appellate advance expense paid to the appellate plaintiff upon request, to close the path of Correction of the decision. (\u00a4\u00a4)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court Of The Republic Of Turkey 15.Legal Department Basis: 2016\/3094 Decision: 2016\/3597 Decision Date: 21.06.2016 A CASE FOR THE CANCELLATION OF THE APPEAL \u2013 IN WHICH BOTH PARTIES ARE MERCHANTS AND RELATE TO THE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE OF THE PARTIES \u2013 VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[217,223,220,218],"yoast_head":"\n