Araştırma Makalesi

MEDENİ USUL HUKUKUNDA OKUNAMAYAN VEYA UYGUNSUZ YAHUT İLGİSİZ DİLEKÇE (HMK m. 32)

Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1 30 Nisan 2024
PDF İndir
EN TR

IN CIVIL PROCEDURAL LAW UNREADABLE OR INAPPROPRIATE OR IRRELEVANT PETITION (CCP ART. 32)

Abstract

The “conduct and management of the proceedings” regulated in the first paragraph of Article 32 of the CCP titled “Principles governing the proceedings” is divided into two as formal and substantive conduct and management. The fact that the petitions submitted to the court should be written in a certain discipline, especially that the petitions should be readable, relevant to the case and should not contain inappropriate expressions is directly related to the formal conduct of the proceedings. The second paragraph of Article 32 of the CCP defines the formal conduct of the proceedings as follows: “An appropriate period of time shall be granted for the reorganization of the petition that cannot be read or is inappropriate or irrelevant, and this petition shall remain in the file. If a new petition is not filed within the given time, no further time shall be granted.” While the said provision was written as “inappropriate documents” in general terms during the abrogated CPC period, it was included in the CCP as “petition that cannot be read or is inappropriate or irrelevant”. In this study; the purpose of the current regulation, the areas in which it has become functional in civil proceedings, the issues that need to be explained in terms of the meanings of the concepts of “unreadable petition”, “improper petition” and “irrelevant petition” mentioned in the provision, and the provisions and consequences of the said regulation have been examined in detail.

Keywords

Irrelevant Documents , Management and Administration , Unreadable Petition , Inappropriate Petition , Irrelevant Petition

Kaynakça

  1. Akil, Cenk. “Medeni Yargılama Hukukunda Mahkeme Tarafından Atanan Bilirkişi–Uzman Tanık Ayrımı”. ABD. 2 (2011): s. 171-183.
  2. Akyol Aslan, Leyla. Medeni Usul Hukukunda Cevap Dilekçesi Verilmemesinin Sonuçları. Ankara: Yetkin Yayın-ları, 2019.
  3. Alangoya, Yavuz. Medenî Usul Hukukunda Vakıaların ve Delillerin Toplanmasına İlişkin İlkeler. İstanbul: Fa-külteler Matbaası, 1979.
  4. Alangoya, Yavuz. “Medenî Usulün Amacı ve Sosyal Karakteri Açısından Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu Tasarı-sı’nın Bazı Hükümlerinin Değerlendirilmesi”, Medenî Usûl ve İcra-İflâs Hukukçuları Toplantısı V, An-kara: TBB Yayınları, 2007: s. 33-54.
  5. Alangoya, Yavuz. “Yargılamanın Sevkinde Prensipler ve Bu Açıdan 1711 Sayılı Kanun ile Değiştirilen 409. Madde Açısından Düşünceler”, Yavuz Alangoya Makaleler, (Seçen ve Derleyen Mert Namlı), İstanbul: Beta Yayınevi, 2012: s. 115-144.
  6. Ansay, Sabri Şakir. Hukuk Yargılama Usulleri. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Yayınları, 1960.
  7. Arslan, Ramazan, Ejder Yılmaz, Sema Taşpınar Ayvaz ve Emel Hanağası. Medeni Usul Hukuku. Ankara: Yetkin Yayınları, 2023.
  8. Atalı, Murat, İbrahim Ermenek ve Ersin Erdoğan. Medeni Usul Hukuku. Ankara: Yetkin Yayınları, 2023.
  9. Baumgartner, Samuel, Annette Dolge, Alexander R. Markus ve Karl Spühler. Schweizerisches Zivilprozessrecht mit Grundzügen des internationalen Zivilprozessrechts, 10. Auflage. Bern: Stämpfli Verlag, 2018.
  10. Bilge, Necip ve Ergun Önen. Medeni Yargılama Hukuku Dersleri. Ankara: Sevinç Matbaası, 1978.

Kaynak Göster

Chicago
Kodakoğlu, Mehmet. 2024. “MEDENİ USUL HUKUKUNDA OKUNAMAYAN VEYA UYGUNSUZ YAHUT İLGİSİZ DİLEKÇE (HMK m. 32)”. Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası 4 (1): 307-42. https://doi.org/10.59909/khm.1433349.

Cited By

Medeni Usul Hukukunda (İlk) Tensip Tutanağı

Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi

https://doi.org/10.34246/ahbvuhfd.1752920