Journals / Erzincan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi / 2012 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1-2

Türkiye’de mutad meskeni olmayan Türk vatandaşları için teminat gösterme yükümlülüğü (hmk m.84/1-a)

Pages
225–246
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
🔖

Cite This Article

KIYAK, E. (2022). Türkiye’de mutad meskeni olmayan Türk vatandaşları için teminat gösterme yükümlülüğü (hmk m.84/1-a). Erzincan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1-2, 225–246. https://ajindex.com/articles/505529

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

  1. Alexy, Robert, “Jürgen Habermas’s Theory of Legal Discourse”, Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 17, (1995-1996), pp. 1027-1034.
  2. Alexy, Robert, “Law, Morality, and The Existence of Human Rights”, Ratio Juris. Vol. 25, No. 1 March 2012, pp. 2-14.
  3. Barnard, Frederick M., Democratic Legitimacy: Plural Values and Politi- cal Power, McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2001.
  4. Baxter, Hugh, “Habermas’s Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy”, Buffalo Law Review, Vol. 50, (2002), pp. 205-340.
  5. Blackstone, William, Commentaries on The Laws of England, (Book The First), Clarendon Press, Oxford 1765. Blaug, Ricardo, Democracy, Real and Ideal, Discourse Ethics and Radical Politics, State University of New York Press, 1999.
  6. Bulut, Nihat, “Demokrasiyi İdeal Anlamına Yaklaştırma Çabası Olarak Radikal Demokrasi”, Atatütk Üniversitesi Erzincan Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, C.VII, sayı 1-2 (Haziran 2003), ss. 41-68.
  7. Cohen, Joshua, “Reflections on Habermas on Democracy”, Ratio Juris, Vol. 12, No. 4, (December 1999), pp. 385-416. D’Aspremont, Jean, “Legtimacy of Governments in The Age of Democ- racy”, International Law and Politics, (2006), Vol.38, pp. 877-917.
  8. Dahl, Robert A., Demokrasi ve Eleştirileri, (Çev. Levent Köker), Yetkin Yayınları, Ankara 1996.
  9. Donnelly, Jack, “Human Rights, Democracy, and Development”, Human Rights Quarterly”, Vol. 21, (1999, pp. 608-632.
  10. Feteris, Eveline T., “The Rationality of Legal Discourse in Habermas Dis- course Theory”, Informal Logic, Vol. 23, No. 2 (2003), pp. 139-159.
  11. Feteris, Eveline T., Hukukî Argümantasyonun Temelleri, (Çev. Ertuğrul Uzun) 1. Baskı,
  12. Paradigma Yayını, İstanbul, 2010.
  13. Finlasyon, James Gordon, “Habermas’s Moral Cognitivism and Frege- Geach Challenge”, Europen Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 13, issue 3, (2005), pp. 319-344.
  14. Finnis, John, “The Natural Law Tradition”, Legal Education, Vol. 36, (1986), pp. 492-495.
  15. Gözler, Kemal, Hukukun Genel Teorisine Giriş: Hukuk Normlarının Geçer- liliği Ve Yorumu Sorunu, US-A yayıncılık Ankara 1998.
  16. Greenawalt, Kent, “How Persuasive is Natural Law Theory”, Notre Dame Law Review, Vol. 75, (1999-2000), pp. 1647-1680.
  17. Habermas, Jürgen, “Law and Morality, (Translated by Kenneth Baynes), The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, Delivered at Harvard University October 1 and 2 1986, pp. 219-279.
  18. Habermas, Jürgen, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discour- se Theory of Law and Democracy, (Translated by William Rehg), Second Printing, The MIT Press 1996.
  19. Habermas, Jürgen, İletişimsel Eylem Kuramı, (Çev. Mustafa