SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 21 Sayı: 1

DEMAND CONDITION FOR AWARDING EXECUTION COMPENSATION AND ITS EVALUATION IN REGARD TO THE PRINCIPLE OF BEING BOUND BY THE SCOPE OF DEMAND

İCRA TAZMİNATINA HÜKMEDİLEBİLMESİNDE TALEP KOŞULU VE TALEPLE BAĞLILIK İLKESİ BAKIMINDAN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Ayşe Kılınç0000-0003-4420-0082
Pages
205–231
Publication Date
2019-06-21
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In this study, it is trying to be examined associated with the principle of being bound by the scope of demand whether the demand condition is essential or not in awarding execution compensation in provisions related to execution compansation in the Code of Execution and Bankruptcy.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:According to the principle of being bound by the scope of demand which rules the law of civil procedure, the judge is bound by the demand of the parties to the case, can not decide on anything other than the request or demand but according to the case, he is able to decide less than result of demand (Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 26).
📊
Key Findings & Data:The essence of enforcement law is that judge cannot award without demand, as well.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this study, it is trying to be examined associated with the principle of being bound by the scope of demand whether the demand condition is essential or not in awarding execution compensation in provisions related to execution compansation in the Code of Execution and Bankruptcy.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:İcra tazminatı · icra inkâr tazminatı · kötü niyet tazminatı

Abstract

According to the principle of being bound by the scope of demand which rules the law of civil procedure, the judge is bound by the demand of the parties to the case, can not decide on anything other than the request or demand but according to the case, he is able to decide less than result of demand (Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 26). The essence of enforcement law is that judge cannot award without demand, as well. However, it is essential to indicate that this basic principle is not valid in some regulations related to execution compensation in the enforcement law. Since, in some provisions related to execution compensation in the Code of Execution and Bankruptcy, related parties do not need to request execution compensation for awarding execution compensation. When the other conditions of the awarding execution compensation that is stated in the Law occur, the court bring in a verdict of execution compensation automatically. In this study, it is trying to be examined associated with the principle of being bound by the scope of demand whether the demand condition is essential or not in awarding execution compensation in provisions related to execution compansation in the Code of Execution and Bankruptcy.

Özet

Medenî usûl hukukuna hâkim olan taleple bağlılık ilkesi gereği, Hâkim,

🔖

Cite This Article

Kılınç, A. (2019). DEMAND CONDITION FOR AWARDING EXECUTION COMPENSATION AND ITS EVALUATION IN REGARD TO THE PRINCIPLE OF BEING BOUND BY THE SCOPE OF DEMAND. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 21 Sayı: 1, 205–231. https://doi.org/10.33717/deuhfd.567622

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (28)

  1. Akil, Cenk: “İtirazın İptali Davasında İcra İnkar Tazminatının Şartı Olarak Borçlunun İtirazının Haksızlığına Karar Verilmesi”, İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, C. 3, S. 1, Y. 2012, s. 317-337.
  2. Arslan, Ramazan/Yılmaz, Ejder/Taşpınar-Ayvaz, Sema/Hanağası, Emel: Medenî Usûl Hukuku, 4. Baskı, Ankara 2018.
  3. Arslan, Ramazan/Yılmaz, Ejder/Taşpınar-Ayvaz, Sema/Hanağası, Emel: İcra ve İflâs Hukuku, 4. Baskı, Ankara 2018. (Kısaltma: Arslan/Yılmaz/ Taşpınar-Ayvaz/Hanağası, İcra ve İflas Hukuku)
  4. Atalı, Murat/Ermenek, İbrahim/Erdoğan, Ersin: Medenî Usûl Hukuku Ders Kitabı, Ankara, 2018.
  5. Deynekli, Adnan/Kısa, Sedat: İtirazın İptali Davları, İcra İnkâr ve Kötüniyet Tazminatı, 3. Baskı, Ankara 2013.
  6. Ercan, İbrahim: “Bir Yargıtay Kararı Işığında İcra ve İflâs Kanunu Madde 170’de Düzenlenen Kötü Niyet Tazminatı Hakkında Bazı Düşünceler”, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, C. 16, Özel Sayı 2014, (Prof. Dr. Hakan Pekcanıtez’e Armağan), 2015, s. 2207-2219.
  7. Erdönmez, Güray: Pekcanıtez Usûl, Medenî Usûl Hukuku, 15. Bası, İstanbul 2017.
  8. Grunsky, Wolfgang/Jacoby, Florian: Zivilprozessrecht, 15. überarbeitete Auflage, München 2016.
  9. Hanağası, Emel: Medenî Yargılama Hukukunda Silahların Eşitliği, Ankara 2016.
  10. Karslı, Abdurrahim: Medenî Muhakeme Hukuku Ders Kitabı, 6100 sayılı HMK hükümlerine göre Yargıtay Kararları işlenmiş ve gözden geçirilmiş 2. baskı, İstanbul 2011.
  11. Kazancı İçtihat ve Mevzuat Bilgi Bankası (www.kazanci.com.tr). Kuru, Baki: “İcra İnkâr Tazminatı”, Yargıtay Yüzüncü Yıldönümü Armağanı, İstanbul 1968, s. 725-765.
  12. Kuru, Baki: İcra ve İflâs Hukuku El Kitabı, Tamamen Yeniden Yazılmış ve Genişletilmiş İkinci Baskı, Ankara 2013. (Kısaltma: Kuru, El Kitabı) Lexpera Hukuk Bilgi Sistemi (www.lexpera.com.tr).
  13. Meriç, Nedim: Medenî Yargılama Hukukunda Tasarruf İlkesi (Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu Hükümleri Çerçevesinde), Ankara 2011.
  14. Muşul, Timuçin: İcra ve İflâs Hukuku C. I, Güncellenmiş Genişletilmiş 6. Baskı, Ankara 2013.
  15. Özekes, Muhammet: İcra Hukukunda Temel Haklar ve İlkeler, Ankara 2009.
  16. Pekcanıtez, Hakan: Pekcanıtez Usûl Medenî Usûl Hukuku, 15. Bası, İstanbul 2017.
  17. Pekcanıtez, Hakan/Atalay, Oğuz/Özekes, Muhammet: Medenî Usûl Hukuku Ders Kitabı, 4. Bası, Ankara 2016.
  18. Pekcanıtez, Hakan/Atalay, Oğuz/Sungurtekin-Özkan, Meral/Özekes, Muhammet: İcra ve İflâs Hukuku Ders Kitabı, 2. Bası, Ankara 2015.
  19. Postacıoğlu, İlhan E.: “İcrada İnkar Tazminatı Üzerine Düşünceler ve Bazı İhtilaflı Noktalar”, BATİDER, C. IX, S. 4, Y. 1978, s. 951-970.
  20. Rosenberg, Leo/Schwab, Karl Heinz/Gottwald, Peter: Zivilprozessrecht, 17. neu bearbeitete Auflage, München, 2010.
  21. Staehelin, Adrian/Staehelin, Daniel/Grolimund, Pascal: Zivilprozessrecht Unter Einbezug des Anwaltsrechts und des internationalen Zivilprozessrechts, 2. Auflage, Zürich 2013.
  22. Sutter-Somm, Thomas/Arx, Gregor von: Kommentar zur Schweizerischen Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO), 2. Auflage, (Herausgeber: Thomas Sutter- Somm/Franz Hasenböhler/Christoph Leuenberger), Zürich, 2013.
  23. Tanrıver, Süha: Medenî Usûl Hukuku C.I Temel Kavramlar ve İlk Derece Yargılaması, Ankara 2016.
  24. Uyar, Talih/Uyar, Alper/Uyar, Cüneyt: Olumsuz (Menfi) Tespit ve Geri Alma (İstirdat) Davaları, Genişletilmiş ve Yeniden Yazılmış 4. Baskı, Ankara 2015.
  25. Yılmaz, Ejder: Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu Şerhi C.1 (1-70), 3. Baskı, Ankara 2017.
  26. Yılmaz, Ejder: Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu Şerhi C.2 (71-224), 3. Baskı, Ankara 2017.
  27. Yılmaz, Ejder: “İcra Tazminatı”, Haluk Konuralp Anısına Armağan C. II, Ankara 2009. (Kısaltma: Yılmaz, İcra Tazminatı)
  28. Zeiss, Walter/Schreiber, Klaus: Zivilprozessrecht (10. Neubearbeitete Auflage), Tübingen 2003.