FRANSIZ, ALMAN VE İSVİÇRE HUKUKLARININ TÜRK İSPAT HUKUKUNA ETKİLERİ

Abstract

Turk Medeni Usul Kanunu, Tiirkiye Cumhuriyeti kurulduktan sonra iktibas doneminde, 7.4.1925 tarihli Neuenburg (Neuchatel) Medeni Usul Kanunu esas almarak duzenlenmi~tir. Bu sebeple, Kanunumuzda, uluslararasz alanda benimsenen ilkeler on plana (:lkmaktadzr. Turk doktrini, kesin delilleri takdiri delillerden ayzrmaktadzr ve doktrinde kanuni is pat teorisi hukum surmektedir. Turk kazai i(:tihadz da bu teoriyi takip etmektedir. Ancak delillerin serbestre degerlendirilmesi ilkesi tam bir uygulama alanz bulamamaktadzr. jspat yukii konusunda doktrinde ve uygulamada norm teorisi kullanzlmaktadzr. Turk doktrininde hakim olan da~anceye gore, medeni usul muhakemesinin amacz, ger~ege ula~maktzr. ispat hukuku a~zsmdan konuya bakzldzgmda, delillerin degerlendirilmesi, isticvap vasztasz ile ispat, senetle ispat ve delil sozle~mesi onemli yer tutmaktadzr. (:alz~mamzzda, bu kurumlar, uluslararasz hukuk ve medeni usul hukuku ilkeleri ile beraber ele almarak incelenmi~tir. 

Keywords

• FRANSIZ
• ALMAN
• İSVİÇRE

FRANSIZ, ALMAN VE İSVİÇRE HUKUKLARININ TÜRK İSPAT HUKUKUNA ETKİLERİ

Abstract

After the Turkish Republic was established, Turkish Civil Procedural Law was enacted in the adoption period on the basis of the Neuenburg (Neuchatel) Civil Procedural Law dated 7.4.1925. Therefore, the principles recognized in the international area appear in the foreground of our code.

The Turkish doctrine differentiates the binding evidence from the free appreciating evidence and the legal evidence theory prevails in the doctrine. The Turkish jurisdiction follows this theory. On the other hand, the principle o f free assessment o f the evidences can not be implemented completely.

In the matter of " subjective burden of proof' norm theory is used in the doctrine and in practice.

According to the predominant idea in the Turkish doctrine, the aim of the Civil Procedure Law is to reach the reality. From the point of view of the Law of Evidence, the assessment of the evidences, proving a case via hearing, proving a case with documentary evidence and evidence contracts have critical roles. In our work, these institutions are analyzed taking into consideration the principles o f the Civil Procedure Law and International Law. 

References

1. -