15 Apr Zone Limitation And Time Limitation In Terms Of Implementation Of The Decision To Delay Execution Follow-up Due To Corona Virus
Zone Limitation And Time Limitation In Terms Of Implementation Of The Decision
In the resolution, it was clearly decided to stop’ nationwide ” proceedings and follow-ups.
April March 20, 2020, the date on which the decision was published and entered into force, and until April 30, 2020, it was decided to enter into force the Article 330 of the law No. 2004.
Although only ‘execution proceedings’ are said to stop in Article 330 of the law No. 2004, the resolution makes detailed arrangements on the subject, except for execution proceedings, bankruptcy proceedings and precautionary foreclosures.
(II) Party proceedings, (iii)no new enforcement and bankruptcy proceedings, (iv) No enforcement or execution of injunctive lien decisions, and (IV) no enforcement or execution of injunctive lien decisions.
i. New execution proceedings and bankruptcy proceedings as clearly stated in the resolution, it is not legally possible to obtain new execution and bankruptcy proceedings between 22.03.2020 and 30.04.20220 by the executive and Bankruptcy directorates. So no truth or
the legal person shall not be able to open execution and bankruptcy proceedings to any other natural or legal person.
ii. Party and follow-up transactions it is important to determine whether the transactions made in enforcement law are execution or party follow-up transactions. Because the legislator attached different results to the execution follow-up process. The first of these results is by the execution follow-up process
the second result is that, as a rule, execution follow-up can not be done in holiday-talik situations. For this reason, such as the follow-up request, transactions that do not qualify as execution follow-up can also be performed in holiday-talik States.1 for this reason, the execution and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004 ‘holiday in exceptional cases’
titled 330. Determination of execution follow-up procedures will be important for the implementation of the article.
If the elements of the execution follow-up process are,
* Execution by the executive body,
* Against the debtor
* Making progress of forced execution
as evaluated under three titles.
” Within this framework which ensures the fulfillment of the right arising from the material law, the organs which have the authority to use force and whose powers are determined by the law ” are defined as the executive branch of algebra.2 executive organs are divided into two as principal and auxiliary executive organs. Established for executive works only
organs are the principal executive organs. These are the Executive Office, the executive Court and the legal offices of the Supreme Court tasked with the executive-bankruptcy Affairs. Other than their principal duties, the executive organs are the auxiliary executive organs.
In order for a transaction to be considered an execution follow-up operation, it must be carried out by the Enforcement office, the enforcement court or the general courts. Hence the creditor, debtor or 3. the operations of persons for execution follow-up cannot be considered as” execution follow-up process”.
In order to qualify the follow-up process as the execution follow-up process, it must be done against the “debtor”. The creditor or 3 of the executive bodies. their actions against individuals are not Enforcement follow-up operations. In addition, transactions relating to the inner workings of executive bodies cannot also be referred to as executive follow-up operations. Enforcement
the initiator and the person who wants to obtain his claim is the creditor, while the other party is the debtor. The debtor is a concept that depends on the creditor. The person whom the creditor refers to as “debtor” in the follow-up request gains the title of debtor and follow-up transactions are carried out against this debtor. In this sense, the principle of the party in its form is valid in execution law; the person specified by the creditor in the follow-up request is accepted as the party.
3 except the creditor and debtor in execution proceedings. persons may also take part in or follow 3. people’s interests may be violated. (E.g.; 3. the person may have instituted the right of pledge for the receivable subject to follow-up (M.146/I, 149/I, 149b / I) or 3. the property and rights of persons may be confiscated with the belief that they belong to the debtor (m.89, 94, 96-99, 228).) 3. persons play an active role in execution, although they are not directly related to execution follow-up or the outcome of the follow-up. This is the case, however, 3. the fact that people are one of the parties to the enforcement proceedings does not constitute a consequence. 3. persons are only parties to complaints and lawsuits against them. Therefore 3. execution because transactions against persons do not meet the requirement that they “be made against the debtor”
it cannot qualify as a follow-up process. If there is a discretionary follow-up friendship between debtors, it does not need to be done against the whole of the debtors in order to qualify the transaction made by the executive bodies as an execution follow-up operation. Only the transaction against the debtor concerned is sufficient to qualify the execution follow-up transaction. Because in discretionary follow-up friendship, follow-up friends can act independently of each other. The execution follow-up process must be of the nature that ensures the progress of the forced execution. These transactions are transactions that bring the creditor closer to its target. The execution follow-up process is for the purpose of collecting the creditor’s receivables. Payment order, notification of payment order, removal of objection, foreclosure proceedings giving time to the debtor can be cited as an example of execution follow-up process. However, the apportionment of coins (m. 138 et al.), the execution is not the follow-up process.
As stated in the resolution, only ‘party follow-up operations’ have been halted. We believe that the qualification of the party follow-up process not used in the technical sense in the decision should be considered as ‘execution follow-up operations’ in accordance with the execution Bankruptcy Law No. 2004. For this reason, we believe that there is no harm in continuing the non-execution follow-up process.
No Comments