Görüntüleme
43
İndirme
12
MÖHUK’ta yabancı mahkeme ilâmının, Türk hukukunda tenfizi için aranan şartlar arasında, kararın hukuk devletinden sadır olması şartı yer almamaktadır. Ancak yabancı mahkemedeki yargılamanın, hukuk devleti ilkelerini ihlal etmesi durumunda tenfiz devletinin kamu düzeni müdahalesi söz konusu olabilecektir. Hukuk devleti ilkesinin bir yönünü adil ve tarafsız yargılamanın yapılacağı “mahkeme” kavramı oluşturmaktadır. 5718 sayılı MÖHUK’un 50. maddesinde sadece yabancı mahkeme kararlarının tenfizinden söz edildiğinden, mahkeme kavramı ile neyin anlaşılmasının gerektiği önem arz etmektedir. Tenfizi talep edilen ilâmı veren yabancı mahkemenin yürüttüğü yargılamanın hem adil yargılanma ilkesine hem de Türk usul hukukunun temel prensiplerine aykırı olmaması gerekir. Çalışmamızda, tenfize ilişkin diğer bir mesele olarak arabulucunun verdiği kararların tenfiz edilip edilmeyeceği sınırlı olarak incelenmiştir. Ayrıca, yabancı ödeme emri kararlarının, tenfize ehil kararlar olup olmadığı da inceleme konusu yapılmıştır.
In MÖHUK, the foreign court knowledge is not included among the conditions that are sought for the removal in the Turkish law, the condition that the decision is true of the rule of law. However, in the event that the trial in a foreign court violates the principles of the rule of law, the intervention of the public order by the tax state may be subject to. One aspect of the rule of law forms the concept of "justice" in which a fair and neutral trial will be carried out. As Article 50 of the Law No. 5718 states that only foreign judgments are referred to in the interpretation of the judgment, it is important to understand what the concept of court is. The judgment by the foreign court to give the requested notice should not be contrary to both the principle of fair trial and the basic principles of Turkish procedural law. In our study, another issue concerning the taxation has been limited to the question of whether the decision made by the mediator will be taxed. In addition, it is also the subject of examination whether foreign payment orders are determined or not.
Under MOHUK, the conditions required for the enforcement of a foreign court in Turkish law do not include the requirement that the decision be loyal to the rule of law. Whereas, if a foreign judgement infringes on the principle of rule of law of the state, then the enforcement request will be rejected due to the application of public policy. The Court should be considered as a part of rule of law principle. Although, Turkish Private International Law (PIL) Act no 5718 article 50 considers only foreign court decisions for enforcement, the definition of a court is not regulated in this Act whereas it plays an important role for consideration. The process of a foreign court judgement seeking enforcement in Turkish law should not infringe the right to fair trial and also the fundamental principles of Turkish procedural law. For that reason, the judgment process of the foreign court should also be conform to the principle of rule of law . In this study, the recognition and enforcement of decisions rendered by a mediator is also examined from the point of ending the conflict between parts as final. Additionally, foreign payment orders are discussed in a perspective whether they were being as a court decision and also whether they were considered as an award or not.
Alan : Hukuk
Dergi Türü : Uluslararası
Makale Detay 
Benzer Makaleler
PDF Görüntüle
Dergi Bilgisi
Eseri Dinleyin
Alıntı Yap
Bu Sayfayı Yazdırın
Paylaş
Mendeley
