T.R. SUPREME COURT
20. Law Office
Basis: 2016/8414
Decision: 2016/7571
Decision Date: 13.07.2016
ACTION FOR DAMAGES – DISCLAIMER APPLICABLE TO THE JUDGMENT – THE JUDGE’S REASONS FOR THE REJECTION WAS A CAUSE OF APPEAL FROM THE ESSENTIAL ACT – THE JURISDICTION IS APPROVED
SUMMARY: Regarding the event that is the subject of the case, the trial is made from the file numbered …/… E. of the High Criminal Court, the criminal trial is doing much more extensive research, unlike the civil court, the outcome of the criminal trial, at least the expert report, should be awaited in order to be able to make a fair decision. Alleging that the amount of non-pecuniary damages awarded in the lawsuits filed against the company due to the same incident is very exorbitant, the amount of compensation awarded contradicts the court’s own decisions, the judge lost his impartiality, objectivity and independence, and took the side of the plaintiffs due to the pressure of the public and the press. refusal of the judge has been requested. The reasons put forward for the refusal are grounds for appeal in terms of the merits of the case and are not the reasons defined in Article 36 of the Code of Civil Procedure. For the reasons explained above, it was decided to reject the appeal and uphold the verdict.
Litigation and Decision: During the compensation lawsuit between the parties, the defendant’s attorney applied to the court for refusal.
After the defendant’s attorney demanded that the decision rendered by the authority examining the rejection request be examined by the Supreme Court, after the decision to accept the appeal petition, which was understood to be in time, all the documents in the file were examined and the necessary was considered:
In summary, with the petition dated 16/02/2016 submitted by the defendant’s attorney during the lawsuit between the parties; (… that the work accident that is the subject of the lawsuit is the biggest work accident in Turkey; however, the fact that the accident is the biggest work accident in Turkey cannot be a reason for the trial to be carried out biased; The request for the removal of the measure against the rights and receivables of TKİ, which is the only source of income, was rejected without justification, the “legal aid” requests made by the plaintiff party were accepted without conducting the economic situation research required by the law, and it was possible to get a report from a single file for many lawsuits filed regarding the incident. A trial was held in the file of the High Criminal Court with no. However, contrary to the civil court, criminal proceedings are doing much more extensive research, the outcome of the criminal proceedings, at least the expert report, should be awaited in order to make a fair decision, the amount of non-pecuniary damage awarded in the lawsuits filed against the client company due to the same incident is very exorbitant, the amount of compensation awarded to the court. It has been claimed that the judge has lost his impartiality, objectivity and independence, and that he has decided by taking the side of the plaintiffs due to the pressure of the public and the press…) on the grounds that it contradicts his own decisions.
Upon the rejected judge’s opinion stating that the request should be rejected, the decision rendered by the authority examining the file regarding the rejection of the refusal request on the merits, and the punishment of the defendant … with a disciplinary fine of 1,500,00.-TL, was appealed by the defendant …’s attorney.
Conclusion: The reasons put forward for the judge’s refusal are grounds for appeal in terms of the merits of the case and are not among the reasons defined in Article 36 of the HMK. On 13.07.2016, it was unanimously decided to APPROVE the verdict and to charge the appellant with the approval fee written below.
