Abstract:

In loss insurance contracts, banks are frequently designated as the loss payee in practice, and thus, it is aimed that the bank has a priority right over the insurance indemnity. The Court of Cassation, acting on the idea that the bank has a priority right over the insurance indemnity, attributes certain legal consequences to the the loss payee clause in terms of procedural law and insurance law. The legal problem addressed within the scope of this study is the procedure to be followed in the event that the loss payee (the bank, which is the pledged creditor) does not consent to the lawsuit between the owner of the pledged property and the insurance company, in other words, whether the insured has an active capacity to sue, and whether the consent of the dain-i mürtehini is a condition of the lawsuit. To summarize, this study will examine whether the bank, which has the title of loss payee, has a priority right against the insurance claim creditor and whether the bank's consent is required in the trial of the lawsuits filed against the insurer, based on a decision of the Court of Cassation.

Keywords: