Research Article


DOI :10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002   IUP :10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002    Full Text (PDF)

Out of Judicial Settlement and Its Effect on Trial

Ayşe Kılınç

Under the “dispositional control of the parties principle” which is one of the ruling principles of Civil Procedure Law, parties of a legal dispute have right to end it (in principle). One of the dispute resolution ways in this manner is to make an settlement. Settlement can be defined as an agreement in which parties completely or partially ending the dispute mutually. In the Turkish Civil Procedure Law, settlement is regulated under the Article 313 the following articles of Civil Procedure Code. But, these provisions only covers the in-judicial settlements. Also, there is an another option as “out of judicial settlement” for the parties as well. Out of judicial settlement is an agreement out of the court in which the parties agreed to end the dispute completely or partially at mutual interest point they considered. Out of judicial settlement is an substantive law agreement. There is no necessity of an outstanding ongoing case process at this point. Additionally, an ongoing trial process would not affect the out of judicial settlement. It is needed a transformation of the out of judicial settlement to an injudicial settlement to affect an ongoing trial at the same dispute.

DOI :10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002   IUP :10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002    Full Text (PDF)

Mahkeme Dışında Yapılan Sulh ve Yargılamaya Etkisi

Ayşe Kılınç

Medenî usûl hukukumuza hâkim olan tasarruf ilkesine göre, taraflar -kural olarak- uyuşmazlığı sona erdirmek hususunda tasarruf hakkına sahiptir. Tarafların uyuşmazlığı sona erdirebilmelerine imkan sağlayan kurumlardan biri de sulhtur. Sulh, esas itibariyle tarafların aralarındaki uyuşmazlığa kısmen veya tamamen son verdikleri bir sözleşme olarak tanımlanabilir. Hukukumuzda sulh ile ilgili düzenleme HMK’nın md. 313 vd. yer almaktadır. Ancak belirtilen maddelerdeki düzenlemeler, mahkeme huzurunda yapılan sulhe ilişkindir. Ayrıca tarafların mahkeme dışında sulh olmaları da mümkündür. Buna göre, mahkeme dışında yapılan sulh, tarafların aralarındaki uyuşmazlığı sona erdirmek amacıyla karşılıklı fedakarlıkta bulunmak suretiyle mahkeme dışında yaptıkları bir sözleşmedir. Mahkeme dışında yapılan sulh sözleşmesi hukukî niteliği itibariyle bir maddî hukuk sözleşmesidir. Tarafların mahkeme dışında sulh sözleşmesi yapabilmeleri için derdest bir davanın varlığı gerekmez. Ayrıca derdest bir dava olsa bile mahkeme dışında yapılan sulh sözleşmesi ile devam eden yargılama etkilenmez. Mahkeme dışında yapılan sulh sözleşmesi ile devam eden yargılamanın etkilenebilmesi için mahkeme dışında yapılan sulhün, mahkeme huzurunda yapılan sulhe dönüştürülmesi gerekir. 


EXTENDED ABSTRACT


One of the principles that Civil Procedure Law based on is the “dispositional control of the parties principle”. Under this principle, parties’ have the right solve private law disputes according to their dispositions. Under the principle, dispute parties are free to decide choose or not to choose litigation as way of resolution. Principle also covers to end the dispute by an settlement (in principle). One of the dispute ending options under the principle is the parties settlement agreement. Settlement agreement, generally, is an agreement in which parties agree to ending the dispute with mutual compromise. In other words, it can be also defined as an agreement in which parties completely or partially ending the dispute mutually. Settlement agreement, regulated as an stand alone regulation for the first time in the Article 313/1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) numbered 6100. Under the Article, settlement agreement means that the parties agreement on to ending the dispute completely or partially in an outstanding case. This definition only covers the in-judicial settlement. Because the definition requires a settlement in front of the court. Out of judicial/court settlement is not regulated under the CCP. Because, this kind of settlement fall in the area of the Turkish Code of Obligations. Out of judicial settlement is an agreement out of the court in which the parties agreed to end the dispute completely or partially at mutual interest point they considered. There is no necessity of an outstanding ongoing case process at this point. Additionally, an ongoing trial process would not affect the out of judicial settlement. It is needed a transformation of the out of judicial settlement to an in-judicial settlement to affect an ongoing trial at the same dispute. Out of judicial settlement is an substantive law agreement. This agreement is fall in the provisions (General Provisions) of the Turkish Code of Obligations. Out of judicial settlement agreement is not be need to be made in written because of the “freedom as to form” principle of the Turkish Code of Obligations. If the out of judicial settlement transformed to an in-judicial settlement it could affect an ongoing trial at the same dispute. Parties convey the out of judicial settlement to the court and then court get in record the agreement. After that moment, out of judicial settlement is evaluated as an in-judicial settlement. It is not needed that the whole provisions of the out of judicial settlement to get in recorded in the trial documents. Article 315/1 of the CCP regulates the provisions on effects and solutions of settlement agreements. Under this provisions when the out of judicial settlement transformed to an in-judicial settlement it would has the same legal power and solutions of it. The first solution of this transformation is the ending of existing dispute, in other words ending of the existing court trial. The second important outcome of the in-judicial settlement agreement is that it would have the same legal effect of final court decision. In-judicial settlement has an important another legal effect that it would has the power of the final court decisions under the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code Article 38. If the out of judicial settlement transformed to an in-judicial settlement it would has the same affect as well.


PDF View

References

  • Akil C, “Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu’nda Sulh ve Sulh Yoluyla Şarta Bağlı Hüküm Verilip Verilemeyeceği Meselesi”, (2012) XVI (4) Gazi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 1-17. google scholar
  • Alangoya HY, Yıldrım MK and Deren-Yıldırım N, Medenî Usûl Hukuku Esasları (6. bası Alkım 2006). google scholar
  • Ansay SŞ, “Sulh”, (1944) I (2) Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 200-209. google scholar
  • Arslan R, Yılmaz E, Taşpınar-Ayvaz S, Hanağası E, Medenî Usûl Hukuku (4. baskı, Yetkin 2018). google scholar
  • Atalı M, Pekcanıtez Usûl Medenî Usûl Hukuku (15. bası, Oniki Levha 2017). google scholar
  • Atalı M, Ermenek İ and Erdoğan E, Medenî Usûl Hukuku Ders Kitabı (Yetkin 2018). google scholar
  • Budak AC and Karaaslan V, Medenî Usûl Hukuku (Güncellenmiş 2. baskı, Adalet 2018). google scholar
  • Erdönmez, G, Pekcanıtez Usûl Medenî Usûl Hukuku (15. bası, Oniki Levha 2017). google scholar
  • Grob-Andermacher B and Walder-Richli HU, Zivilprozessrecht Nach den Gesetzen des Bundes und des Kantons Zürich unter Berücksichtigung weiterer kantonalen Zivilprozessordnungen und der Schweizerischen Zivilprozessordnung vom 19. Dezember 2008 sowie unter Einschluss internationaler Aspekte (5. vollständig überarbeitete Auflage, Schulthess Juristische Medien AG 2009). google scholar
  • Grunsky W and Jacoby F, Zivilprozessrecht (15. überarbeitete Auflage, Franz Vahlen 2016). google scholar
  • Hess B, Jauernig/ Hess Zivilprozezzrecht (30. völlig neu bearbeitete Auflage, C.H. Beck 2011). google scholar
  • Karauz AK, Sulh Sözleşmesi (Adalet 2014). google scholar
  • Karslı A, Medenî Muhakeme Hukuku Ders Kitabı (6100 sayılı HMK hükümlerine göre Yargıtay Kararları İşlenmiş ve gözden geçirilmiş 2. baskı, Alternatif 2011). google scholar
  • Kazancı Mevzuat ve İçtihat Bilgi Bankası (www.kazanci.com.tr). google scholar
  • Kuru B, İstinaf Sistemine Göre Yazılmış Medenî Usûl Hukuku Ders Kitabı (Yetkin 2017). google scholar
  • Meriç N, Medenî Yargılama Hukukunda Tasarruf İlkesi (Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu Çerçevesinde) (Yetkin 2011). google scholar
  • Önen E, Medenî Yargılama Hukukunda Sulh (Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi 1972). google scholar
  • Rosenberg L, Schwab KH and Gottwald P, Zivilprozessrecht (17. neu bearbeitete Auflage, C.H. Beck 2010). google scholar
  • Soy A, Türk Medenî Yargılama Hukukunda Sulh ( Adalet 2017). google scholar
  • Staehelin A, Staehelin D and Grolimund P, Zivilprozessrecht Unter Einbezug des Anwaltsrechts und des internationalen Zivilprozessrechts (2. Auflage, Schulthess Juristische Medien AG 2013). google scholar
  • Tanrıver S, “Mahkeme Huzurunda Yapılan Sulhler”, (1994) 49 (1) Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi 333-348. google scholar
  • Tanrıver S, Medenî Usûl Hukuku C.I Temel Kavramlar ve İlk Derece Yargılaması (Yetkin 2016). google scholar
  • Ulusan Banu: “Sulh Sözleşmeleri”, 2011-2012 (VIII- IX) 2-1 Yeditepe Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi (Prof. Dr. Erhan ADAL’a Armağan) 975-993. google scholar
  • Üstündağ S, Medenî Yargılama Hukuku C. I-II (Gözden geçirilmiş ve yenilenmiş 7. baskı, Filiz 2000). google scholar

Citations

Copy and paste a formatted citation or use one of the options to export in your chosen format


EXPORT



APA

Kılınç, A. (2019). Out of Judicial Settlement and Its Effect on Trial. Istanbul Law Review, 77(2), 503-521. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002


AMA

Kılınç A. Out of Judicial Settlement and Its Effect on Trial. Istanbul Law Review. 2019;77(2):503-521. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002


ABNT

Kılınç, A. Out of Judicial Settlement and Its Effect on Trial. Istanbul Law Review, [Publisher Location], v. 77, n. 2, p. 503-521, 2019.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Kılınç, Ayşe,. 2019. “Out of Judicial Settlement and Its Effect on Trial.” Istanbul Law Review 77, no. 2: 503-521. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002


Chicago: Humanities Style

Kılınç, Ayşe,. Out of Judicial Settlement and Its Effect on Trial.” Istanbul Law Review 77, no. 2 (Dec. 2021): 503-521. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002


Harvard: Australian Style

Kılınç, A 2019, 'Out of Judicial Settlement and Its Effect on Trial', Istanbul Law Review, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 503-521, viewed 9 Dec. 2021, https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Kılınç, A. (2019) ‘Out of Judicial Settlement and Its Effect on Trial’, Istanbul Law Review, 77(2), pp. 503-521. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002 (9 Dec. 2021).


MLA

Kılınç, Ayşe,. Out of Judicial Settlement and Its Effect on Trial.” Istanbul Law Review, vol. 77, no. 2, 2019, pp. 503-521. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002


Vancouver

Kılınç A. Out of Judicial Settlement and Its Effect on Trial. Istanbul Law Review [Internet]. 9 Dec. 2021 [cited 9 Dec. 2021];77(2):503-521. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002 doi: 10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002


ISNAD

Kılınç, Ayşe. Out of Judicial Settlement and Its Effect on Trial”. Istanbul Law Review 77/2 (Dec. 2021): 503-521. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0002



TIMELINE


Submitted11.07.2019
Last Revision25.12.2019
Accepted26.12.2019

LICENCE


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


SHARE




Istanbul University Press aims to contribute to the dissemination of ever growing scientific knowledge through publication of high quality scientific journals and books in accordance with the international publishing standards and ethics. Istanbul University Press follows an open access, non-commercial, scholarly publishing.