Evaluatıon Of The Jurısdıctıon's Decısıon To Remove The Decısıon On The Appoıntment Of A Trustee For The Management Of The Company Accordıng To Artıcle 133 Of Crımınal Procedure Law

Mehmet Saydam

Article Details

Evaluatıon Of The Jurısdıctıon's Decısıon To Remove The Decısıon On The Appoıntment Of A Trustee For The Management Of The Company Accordıng To Artıcle 133 Of Crımınal Procedure Law

Authors:

Mehmet Saydam

Publisher:

Sakarya University

Main Topics:

Hukuk

Journal:

Sakarya Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.11 Issue 1, pp.445-468

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

8/2023

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001287925

pISSN:

2147-768X

Keywords:

Abstract:

 The protection measure for the appointing of a trustee for the company management is a particular protection measure regulated in Article 133 of the Criminal Procedure Law numbered 5271. Although the relevant legal regulation arranges how and under what conditions the measure will be decided. Despite this, there is no clear statement that the measure will automatically end upon the decision not to prosecute during the investigation phase. This issue has been the subject of both doctrinal views and judicial jurisprudence. In practice, it is accepted that the protection measure of the appointing a trustee will end automatically upon the decision not to prosecute. Generally, it is seen that the court of peace rejected the requests for the removal of the measure because of no ground for rendering a verdict. This situation causes the company management to remain in the trustees management unfairly for extended periods months. Also, the company partnersowners cannot take back control of the company management, and this issue is criticized. In this respect, due to the appointment of a trustee for the company management protection measure, which continues to be applied unjustly, it will be possible to cause grievances of individuals and to violate the right of property unlawfully. Within the framework of the decision of the 16th Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, numbered 20185333 and Decision number 20185602 and dated 31122018 on this issue, a solution should be reached by taking into account the legal regulations and doctrinal opinions. In the study, legal regulation, doctrinal views, and jurisprudence of the Supreme Court will be evaluated together, and a solution proposal will be presented by determining the problem.

 The protection measure for the appointing of a trustee for the company management is a particular protection measure regulated in Article 133 of the Criminal Procedure Law numbered 5271. Although the relevant legal regulation arranges how and under what conditions the measure will be decided. Despite this, there is no clear statement that the measure will automatically end upon the decision not to prosecute during the investigation phase. This issue has been the subject of both doctrinal views and judicial jurisprudence. In practice, it is accepted that the protection measure of the appointing a trustee will end automatically upon the decision not to prosecute. Generally, it is seen that the court of peace rejected the requests for the removal of the measure because of no ground for rendering a verdict. This situation causes the company management to remain in the trustees management unfairly for extended periods months. Also, the company partnersowners cannot take back control of the company management, and this issue is criticized. In this respect, due to the appointment of a trustee for the company management protection measure, which continues to be applied unjustly, it will be possible to cause grievances of individuals and to violate the right of property unlawfully. Within the framework of the decision of the 16th Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, numbered 20185333 and Decision number 20185602 and dated 31122018 on this issue, a solution should be reached by taking into account the legal regulations and doctrinal opinions. In the study, legal regulation, doctrinal views, and jurisprudence of the Supreme Court will be evaluated together, and a solution proposal will be presented by determining the problem.

 The protection measure for the appointing of a trustee for the company management is a particular protection measure regulated in Article 133 of the Criminal Procedure Law numbered 5271. Although the relevant legal regulation arranges how and under what conditions the measure will be decided. Despite this, there is no clear statement that the measure will automatically end upon the decision not to prosecute during the investigation phase. This issue has been the subject of both doctrinal views and judicial jurisprudence. In practice, it is accepted that the protection measure of the appointing a trustee will end automatically upon the decision not to prosecute. Generally, it is seen that the court of peace rejected the requests for the removal of the measure because of no ground for rendering a verdict. This situation causes the company management to remain in the trustees management unfairly for extended periods months. Also, the company partnersowners cannot take back control of the company management, and this issue is criticized. In this respect, due to the appointment of a trustee for the company management protection measure, which continues to be applied unjustly, it will be possible to cause grievances of individuals and to violate the right of property unlawfully. Within the framework of the decision of the 16th Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, numbered 20185333 and Decision number 20185602 and dated 31122018 on this issue, a solution should be reached by taking into account the legal regulations and doctrinal opinions. In the study, legal regulation, doctrinal views, and jurisprudence of the Supreme Court will be evaluated together, and a solution proposal will be presented by determining the problem.

 Şirket yönetimi için kayyım tayini 5271 sayılı CMKnın 133. maddesinde düzenlenmiş özel nitelikte bir koruma tedbiridir. İlgili maddede tedbire nasıl ve hangi şartlarla karar verileceği düzenlenmiş olmasına rağmen, soruşturma evresinde kovuşturmaya yer olmadığı kararı üzerine tedbirin kendiliğinden sona ereceğine ilişkin açık bir ifadeye yer verilmemiştir. Bu husus hem öğreti görüşlerine hem de yargı içtihatlarına konu olmuştur. Uygulamada ise, kovuşturmaya yer olmadığı kararı üzerine kayyım tayini koruma tedbirinin kendiliğinden sona ereceği kabul edilerek hareket edildiği ve fakat sulh ceza hakimliklerinin bu kabulden hareketle kendilerine yapılan tedbirin kaldırılmasına ilişkin talepleri karar vermeye yer olmadığı gerekçesiyle reddettiği görülmüştür. Bu durum ise, uzun süreler aylarca şirket yönetimlerinin haksız olarak kayyımda kalmasına neden olduğu ve şirket ortaklarısahipleri tarafından şirket yönetimlerinin geri alınamamasına sebebiyet verdiği gerekçesiyle eleştirilmiştir. Bu bakımdan haksız olarak uygulanmaya devam edilen şirket yönetimi için kayyım tayini koruma tedbiri nedeniyle bireylerin mağduriyetine sebep olunması ve mülkiyet hakkının hukuka aykırı olarak ihlal edilmesi söz konusu olacaktır. Bu konuya ilişkin verilmiş Yargıtay 16. Ceza Dairesinin 20185333 Esas ve 20185602 Karar sayılı ve 31122018 tarihli kararı çerçevesinde yasal düzenleme ve öğreti görüşleri de dikkate alınarak bir çözüme ulaşılması gerekmektedir. Çalışmada yasal düzenleme, öğreti görüşleri ve Yargıtay içtihadı birlikte değerlendirilerek sorunun tespiti yapılacak ve çözüm önerisi sunulacaktır.

Article Details

Evaluatıon Of The Jurısdıctıon's Decısıon To Remove The Decısıon On The Appoıntment Of A Trustee For The Management Of The Company Accordıng To Artıcle 133 Of Crımınal Procedure Law

Authors:

Mehmet Saydam

Publisher:

Sakarya University

Main Topics:

Hukuk

Journal:

Sakarya Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.11 Issue 1, pp.445-468

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

8/2023

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001287925

pISSN:

2147-768X

Appointment of trustee

protective measure

strong suspicion

decision of non-prosecution

no ground for rendering a verdict.Kayyım tayini

koruma tedbiri

kuvvetli şüphe

kovuşturmaya yer olmadığı

karar vermeye yer olmadığı

Issues

Article Details

Authors: Mehmet Saydam

Publisher: Sakarya University

Main Topics: Hukuk

Journal: Sakarya Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.11 Issue 1, pp.445-468

Document Type: Article

Publication Date: 8/2023

Document Language: Turkish

Document ID (Org No.): 2001287925

pISSN: 2147-768X

Issues

Authors:

Mehmet Saydam

Publisher:

Sakarya University

Main Topics:

Hukuk

Journal:

Sakarya Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.11 Issue 1, pp.445-468

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

8/2023

Document Language:

Turkish

Document ID (Org No.):

2001287925

pISSN:

2147-768X