{"id":10984,"date":"2022-06-17T14:25:33","date_gmt":"2022-06-17T14:25:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/?p=10984"},"modified":"2022-06-17T14:25:36","modified_gmt":"2022-06-17T14:25:36","slug":"danistay-15-daire-e2018-1822-k2018-5887","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/2022\/06\/17\/danistay-15-daire-e2018-1822-k2018-5887\/","title":{"rendered":"Dan\u0131\u015ftay 15.Daire E:2018\/1822, K:2018\/5887"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h3>T.C.<br>Dan\u0131\u015ftay<br>15. Daire<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Esas No:2018\/1822<\/strong><br><strong>Karar No:2018\/5887<\/strong><br><strong>K. Tarihi:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>T.C.<br>D A N I \u015e T A Y<br><strong>ONBE\u015e\u0130NC\u0130<\/strong><strong>DA\u0130RE<\/strong><br>Esas No : 2018\/1822<br>Karar No : 2018\/5887<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Karar D\u00fczeltme \u0130steminde<br>Bulunanlar 1.&nbsp;<strong>(Daval\u0131) :<\/strong><br>Vekilleri :<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>2. M\u00fcdahil&nbsp;<strong>(Daval\u0131 Yan\u0131nda) :<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Kar\u015f\u0131 Taraf&nbsp;<strong>(Davac\u0131) :<\/strong><br>Vekili<br>\u0130stemin \u00d6zeti :Dan\u0131\u015ftay Onbe\u015finci Dairesi&#8217;nin&nbsp;<strong>21\/12\/2017&nbsp;<\/strong>tarih ve E:2017\/100, K:2017\/7696 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n\u0131n, hukuka uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclerek 2577 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130dari Yarg\u0131lama Usul\u00fc Kanununun 54. maddesi uyar\u0131nca d\u00fczeltilmesi istenilmektedir.<br>Savunman\u0131n \u00d6zeti : Savunma verilmemi\u015ftir.<br>D\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi : Daval\u0131 taraf\u0131n karar d\u00fczeltme isteminin k\u0131smen kabul\u00fc ile, \u0130dare Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n art\u0131r\u0131lan maddi tazminat miktar\u0131na uygulanan faizin ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihine ili\u015fkin k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na, sair karar d\u00fczeltme istemlerinin ise reddine karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmektedir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>T\u00dcRK<\/strong><strong>M\u0130LLET\u0130<\/strong><strong>ADINA<\/strong><br>Karar veren Dan\u0131\u015ftay Onbe\u015finci Dairesi&#8217;nce; daval\u0131 taraf\u0131n karar d\u00fczeltme istemi k\u0131smen kabul edilerek, Dairemizin&nbsp;<strong>21\/12\/2017&nbsp;<\/strong>tarih, E:2017\/100, K:2017\/7696 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 artt\u0131r\u0131lan tazminat miktar\u0131na y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen faizin ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan k\u0131smen kald\u0131r\u0131larak, tetkik hakiminin a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 dinlenip dosyadaki belgeler incelendikten sonra temyiz istemi yeniden incelenmek suretiyle i\u015fin gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fc:<br>Dava; davac\u0131n\u0131n&nbsp;<strong>02.09.2005&nbsp;<\/strong>tarihinde ge\u00e7irdi\u011fi kaza neticesinde &#8230; Devlet Hastanesi&#8217;ne getirildi\u011fi ve&nbsp;<strong>06.09.2005&nbsp;<\/strong>tarihinde yap\u0131lan ameliyat sonras\u0131nda idarenin hizmet kusurundan dolay\u0131 belden a\u015fa\u011f\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n fel\u00e7 oldu\u011fu belirtilerek u\u011fran\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen malull\u00fckten dolay\u0131 150.000-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;kazan\u00e7 kayb\u0131, 150.000-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;bak\u0131m gideri, 40.000-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;bez ve eldiven gideri olmak \u00fczere toplam 340.000-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;maddi ve 100.000-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;manevi tazminat\u0131n olay tarihi olan&nbsp;<strong>06.09.2005&nbsp;<\/strong>tarihinden itibaren y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclecek yasal faiziyle birlikte daval\u0131 idarece tazminine h\u00fckmedilmesi ve t\u0131p biliminde davac\u0131n\u0131n tedavisi ile ilgili olarak ileri y\u0131llarda geli\u015ftirilebilecek tedavilerin s\u0131n\u0131rs\u0131z, \u015farts\u0131z ve bedelsiz olarak daval\u0131 idare taraf\u0131ndan sa\u011flanmas\u0131na, zorunlu fizik tedavisinin evinde aral\u0131ks\u0131z ve bedelsiz olarak sa\u011flanmas\u0131na, psikolojik tedavisinin evinde bedelsiz olarak sa\u011flanmas\u0131na, davac\u0131 durumunda olan hastalar i\u00e7in \u00f6zel olarak \u00fcretilen, d\u0131\u015f mekanlarda kullan\u0131labilen son teknolojik \u00f6zelliklere sahip tekerlekli, ak\u00fcl\u00fc, evde ve d\u0131\u015far\u0131da rahat hareket edebilmesini sa\u011flayan merdiven inip \u00e7\u0131kabilen, hastay\u0131 y\u00fckseltip al\u00e7altabilen mekanizmaya sahip sandalye ve arac\u0131n bedelsiz olarak davac\u0131ya teslimine, hayat\u0131 boyunca bu durumundan kaynaklanan komplikasyonlar\u0131n tedavisinin bedelsiz ve \u015farts\u0131z olarak daval\u0131 idare hastanelerinde yap\u0131lmas\u0131 yolunda karar verilmesi istemiyle a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<br>\u0130dare Mahkemesi&#8217;nce; h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nan A**** *** Kurumu \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc \u0130htisas Kurulunun&nbsp;<strong>20.02.2008&nbsp;<\/strong>g\u00fcnl\u00fc ve 1144 nolu raporunda, Op. Dr. &#8216;nun ameliyat\u0131 hatal\u0131 endikasyonla yapmas\u0131 nedeniyle, ameliyat s\u0131ras\u0131ndaki \u00f6zensizli\u011fi nedeniyle daval\u0131 idare olan &#8230; Devlet Hastanesi&#8217;ndeki i\u015flemlerin t\u0131p kurallar\u0131na uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle malull\u00fckten dolay\u0131 150.000-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;kazan\u00e7 kayb\u0131, 150.000-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;bak\u0131m gideri, 40.000-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;bez ve eldiven gideri olmak \u00fczere toplam 340.000-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;maddi tazminat isteminin ve 70.000-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;manevi tazminat isteminin kabul\u00fc ile an\u0131lan mebla\u011f\u0131n idareye ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren i\u015fletilecek yasal faiziyle birlikte \u00f6denmesi, miktar belirtmeyen gelece\u011fe y\u00f6nelik talepleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ise; tam yarg\u0131 davalar\u0131nda tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n,e\u011fer miktar belirtilemiyorsa nedenlerinin net olarak belirtilmesi \u015fart olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen yukar\u0131da belirtilen hususlar\u0131n miktar olarak belirtilmemesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda bu istemlerin tazmini cihetine gidilmesinin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle miktar olarak belirtilmeyen bu tazminat istemlerinin incelenmeksizin reddi yolunda karar verilmi\u015ftir.<br>\u0130dare Mahkemesi&#8217;nin bu karar\u0131, Dairemizin&nbsp;<strong>17\/09\/2014&nbsp;<\/strong>tarih, E:2013\/3847; K:2014\/6182 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile onanm\u0131\u015f ise de; davac\u0131 taraf\u00e7a sunulan&nbsp;<strong>29\/12\/2014&nbsp;<\/strong>havale tarihli karar d\u00fczeltme dilek\u00e7esinde, d\u00fczeltme talebinin yan\u0131nda 2577 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 6459 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun ile de\u011fi\u015fik 16\/4 maddesi uyar\u0131nca talep edilen maddi tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n 69.420-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;daha art\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 \u00fczerine Dairemizin&nbsp;<strong>30\/05\/2016&nbsp;<\/strong>tarih, E:2015\/935, K:2016\/3894 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile tararflar\u0131n ve daval\u0131 yan\u0131nda m\u00fcdahilin karar d\u00fczeltme istemlerinin reddine, 6459 say\u0131l\u0131 Y**** *** de\u011fi\u015fik 16.maddesine g\u00f6re art\u0131r\u0131lan maddi tazminat miktar\u0131 ile ilgili olarak yeniden bir karar verilmek \u00fczere dosyan\u0131n mahkemesine g\u00f6nderilmesine karar verilmi\u015ftir. Bunun \u00fczerine;<br>\u0130dare Mahkemesince, davac\u0131 taraf\u0131n miktar art\u0131r\u0131m isteminin kabul\u00fcne, art\u0131r\u0131lan 69.420-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;maddi tazminat\u0131n daval\u0131 idareye ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren hesaplanacak yasal faizi ile birlikte daval\u0131 idarece davac\u0131ya \u00f6denmesine karar verilmi\u015f ve Dairemizin&nbsp;<strong>21\/12\/2017&nbsp;<\/strong>tarih, E:2017\/100; K:2017\/7696 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile de an\u0131lan karar onanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<br>Daval\u0131 idare ve daval\u0131 yan\u0131nda m\u00fcdahil taraf\u0131ndan, \u0130dare Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclerek Dairemizin onama karar\u0131 kald\u0131r\u0131larak, \u0130dare Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n temyizen incelenerek bozulmas\u0131 istenilmektedir.<br>2577 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun&nbsp;<strong>18.06.2014&nbsp;<\/strong>g\u00fcn ve 6545 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunla eklenen Ge\u00e7ici 8. maddesinde \u0130vedi yarg\u0131lama usul\u00fc hari\u00e7 olmak \u00fczere bu Kanunla idari yarg\u0131da kanun yollar\u0131na ili\u015fkin getirilen h\u00fck\u00fcmler, 2576 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun, bu Kanunla de\u011fi\u015fik 3 \u00fcnc\u00fc maddesine g\u00f6re kurulan b\u00f6lge idare mahkemelerinin t\u00fcm yurtta g\u00f6reve ba\u015flayacaklar\u0131 tarihten sonra verilen kararlar hakk\u0131nda uygulan\u0131r. Bu tarihten \u00f6nce verilmi\u015f kararlar hakk\u0131nda, karar\u0131n verildi\u011fi tarihte y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan kanun yollar\u0131na ili\u015fkin h\u00fck\u00fcmler uygulan\u0131r. h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015f;<br>2577 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130dari Yarg\u0131lama Usul\u00fc Kanunu&#8217;nun 6545 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunla ilga edilmeden \u00f6nce y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan Karar\u0131n D\u00fczeltilmesi ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 54. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda, Dan\u0131\u015ftay dava dairelerince verilen kararlar hakk\u0131nda bir defaya mahsus olmak \u00fczere taraflarca; a) Karar\u0131n esas\u0131na etkisi olan iddia ve itirazlar\u0131n kararda kar\u015f\u0131lanmam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131, b) Bir kararda birbirine ayk\u0131r\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin bulunmas\u0131, c) Karar\u0131n usul ve Kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulunmas\u0131, d) H\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131n\u0131 etkileyen belgelerde hile ve sahtekarl\u0131\u011f\u0131n ortaya \u00e7\u0131km\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 hallerinde karar\u0131n d\u00fczeltilmesinin istenebilece\u011fi h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015f olup, bu maddenin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131nda da Dan\u0131\u015ftay dava dairelerinin karar\u0131n d\u00fczeltilmesi isteminde ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen sebeplerle ba\u011fl\u0131 olduklar\u0131 kurala ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<br>Dosyadaki belgeler ile iddialar\u0131n incelenmesinden; d\u00fczeltme istemine konu Dairemiz karar\u0131n\u0131n artt\u0131r\u0131lan maddi tazminat miktar\u0131na y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclecek faizin ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihine ili\u015fkin k\u0131sm\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki b\u00f6l\u00fcmlerinin hukuk ve usule uygun oldu\u011fu, d\u00fczeltilmesini gerektirecek bir halin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<br>\u0130dare Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n miktar artt\u0131r\u0131m dilek\u00e7esi ile artt\u0131r\u0131lan tazminat miktar\u0131na idareye ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren faiz i\u015fletilmesine ili\u015fkin k\u0131sm\u0131na onayan Dairemiz karar\u0131n\u0131n, bu k\u0131sm\u0131na y\u00f6nelik karar d\u00fczeltme istemi incelenecek olursa;<br>Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere tam yarg\u0131 davalar\u0131nda istemle ba\u011fl\u0131 olma kural\u0131n\u0131n sebep oldu\u011fu hak kay\u0131plar\u0131n\u0131n giderilmesi amac\u0131yla 2577 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130dari Yarg\u0131lama Usul\u00fc Kanunu&#8217;nun 16. maddesinin 4. f\u0131kras\u0131na,&nbsp;<strong>30\/04\/2013&nbsp;<\/strong>tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 6459 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 4. maddesi ile, Ancak, tam yarg\u0131 davalar\u0131nda dava dilek\u00e7esinde belirtilen miktar, s\u00fcre veya di\u011fer usul kurallar\u0131 g\u00f6zetilmeksizin nihai karar verilinceye kadar, harc\u0131 \u00f6denmek suretiyle bir defaya mahsus olmak \u00fczere art\u0131r\u0131labilir ve miktar\u0131n art\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin dilek\u00e7e otuz g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde cevap verilmek \u00fczere kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa tebli\u011f edilir. c\u00fcmlesi; ayn\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 5. maddesi ile de, 2577 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanuna Ge\u00e7ici 7. madde olarak, Bu maddeyi ihdas eden Kanunla, bu Kanunun 16. maddesinin d\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131na eklenen h\u00fck\u00fcm, kanun yolu a\u015famas\u0131 d\u00e2hil, y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fck tarihinde derdest olan davalarda da uygulan\u0131r. c\u00fcmlesi eklenmi\u015ftir.<br>Nitekim, 6459 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 4. maddesinin (tasar\u0131n\u0131n 3.maddesi) gerek\u00e7esinde, A\u0130HM, devletin sorumlulu\u011funa ili\u015fkin tazminat davalar\u0131nda, davac\u0131lar\u0131n yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yava\u015f i\u015flemesinden do\u011fan zararlar\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131racak yeterli bir \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde \u00fclkemiz aleyhinde ihlal kararlar\u0131 vermektedir. D\u00fczenlemeyle, idari yarg\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131lan tam yarg\u0131 davalar\u0131nda talep edilen tazminat\u0131n daha y\u00fcksek oldu\u011funun dava devam ederken anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 durumunda, davac\u0131ya talep edilen miktar\u0131 artt\u0131rma hakk\u0131 verilmemesinin adil yarg\u0131lama hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlali olarak kabul edilmesi sebebiyle, nihai karar verilinceye kadar \u0131slah suretiyle talep edilen tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131 artt\u0131rma hakk\u0131 tan\u0131nmaktad\u0131r. ifadesine yer verilmi\u015ftir.<br>Faiz; en basit bi\u00e7imiyle, idarenin tazmin borcu ba\u011flam\u0131nda; ki\u015filerin, idarenin eylem ve\/veya i\u015flemlerinden dolay\u0131 u\u011frad\u0131klar\u0131 zararlar\u0131n giderilmesi istemiyle ba\u015fvurmalar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n, idarenin zarar\u0131 kendili\u011finden \u00f6demeyip, yarg\u0131 karar\u0131yla tazminata mahk\u00c3\u00bbm edilmesi sonucunda, idarenin temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc tarihten tazminat\u0131n \u00f6dendi\u011fi tarihe kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in 3095 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanuna g\u00f6re hesaplanacak tutar\u0131 ifade etmektedir.<br>2577 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130dari Yarg\u0131lama Usul\u00fc Kanunu&#8217;nun 13. maddesinde, idari eylemlerden haklar\u0131 ihlal edilmi\u015f olanlar\u0131n dava a\u00e7madan \u00f6nce, bu eylemleri yaz\u0131l\u0131 bildirim \u00fczerine veya ba\u015fka suretle \u00f6\u011frendikleri tarihten itibaren 1 y\u0131l ve her halde eylem tarihinden itibaren 5 y\u0131l i\u00e7inde idareye ba\u015fvurarak haklar\u0131n\u0131n yerine getirilmesini istemeleri gerekti\u011fi; bu isteklerinin k\u0131smen veya tamamen reddi halinde, bu konudaki i\u015flemin tebli\u011fini izleyen g\u00fcnden itibaren veya istek hakk\u0131nda altm\u0131\u015f g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde cevap verilmedi\u011fi takdirde bu s\u00fcrenin bitti\u011fi tarihten itibaren dava s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde dava a\u00e7\u0131labilece\u011fi kural\u0131 yer al\u0131p, an\u0131lan maddede, idari eylemler nedeniyle u\u011fran\u0131lan zarar\u0131n tazmini i\u00e7in idareye ba\u015fvuruda bulunulmas\u0131n\u0131n, dava \u00f6n \u015fart\u0131 olarak \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclmesi ve zarar\u0131n idare taraf\u0131ndan en erken bu tarihte sulhen \u00f6denebilecek olmas\u0131 nedeniyle yarg\u0131 yerince h\u00fckmedilecek tazminat miktar\u0131na, \u00f6n karar i\u00e7in idareye yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvuru tarihi, adli yarg\u0131da dava a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131 halinde adli yarg\u0131da dava a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarih itibariyle yasal faiz uygulanmas\u0131, Dan\u0131\u015ftay&#8217;\u0131n yerle\u015fik i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131yla kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<br>2577 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunda, tam yarg\u0131 davalar\u0131nda, dava dilek\u00e7esindeki miktar\u0131n art\u0131r\u0131m\u0131na olanak tan\u0131yan d\u00fczenleme uyar\u0131nca, davan\u0131n kabul edilmesi halinde art\u0131r\u0131lan tazminat miktar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ise faize, idarenin temerr\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc tarih olan miktar art\u0131r\u0131m\u0131na ili\u015fkin dilek\u00e7enin idareye tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi tarihten itibaren h\u00fckmedilmelidir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Dosyan\u0131n incelenmesinden, dava dilek\u00e7esi ile 340.000-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;olarak talep edilen maddi tazminat miktar\u0131&nbsp;<strong>29\/12\/2014&nbsp;<\/strong>havale tarihli karar d\u00fczeltme dilek\u00e7esi ile 69.420-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;daha art\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, an\u0131lan dilek\u00e7e 05\/01\/2015 tarihinde daval\u0131 idareye tebli\u011f edilmi\u015ftir.<br>Bu durumda, \u0130dare Mahkemesi&#8217;nce miktar art\u0131r\u0131m dilek\u00e7esi ile art\u0131r\u0131lan 69.420-<strong>TL<\/strong>&nbsp;maddi tazminata, miktar art\u0131r\u0131m dilek\u00e7esinin daval\u0131 idareye tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi 05\/01\/2015 tarihinden itibaren faiz i\u015fletilmesine karar verilmesi gerekirken, idareye ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren faiz i\u015fletilmesine karar verilmesinde hukuken isabet g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.<br>A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle, daval\u0131 taraf\u0131n karar d\u00fczeltme isteminin k\u0131smen kabul\u00fc ile Dairemizin&nbsp;<strong>21\/12\/2017&nbsp;<\/strong>tarih, E:2017\/100; K:2017\/7696 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n\u0131n artt\u0131r\u0131lan tazminat miktar\u0131na y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclecek faizin ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihine ili\u015fkin k\u0131sm\u0131 kald\u0131r\u0131larak, 2577 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130dari Yarg\u0131lama Usul\u00fc Kanunu&#8217;nun 49. maddesi uyar\u0131nca \u0130dare Mahkemesi&#8217;nin&nbsp;<strong>19\/10\/2016&nbsp;<\/strong>tarih ve E:2016\/935; K:2016\/987 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n\u0131n artt\u0131r\u0131lan tazminat miktar\u0131na y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclecek faizin ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihine ili\u015fkin k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n&nbsp;<strong>BOZULMASINA<\/strong>, sair karar d\u00fczeltme istemlerinin ise&nbsp;<strong>REDD\u0130NE<\/strong>, bozulan k\u0131s\u0131m hakk\u0131nda yeniden bir karar verilmek \u00fczere dosyan\u0131n an\u0131lan Mahkemeye g\u00f6nderilmesine,&nbsp;<strong>19\/06\/2018&nbsp;<\/strong>tarihinde oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u00dcye<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u00dcye<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u00dcye<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u00dcye<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>T.C.Dan\u0131\u015ftay15. Daire Esas No:2018\/1822Karar No:2018\/5887K. Tarihi: T.C.D A N I \u015e T A YONBE\u015e\u0130NC\u0130DA\u0130REEsas No : 2018\/1822Karar No : 2018\/5887 Karar D\u00fczeltme \u0130stemindeBulunanlar 1.&nbsp;(Daval\u0131) :Vekilleri : 2. M\u00fcdahil&nbsp;(Daval\u0131 Yan\u0131nda) : Kar\u015f\u0131 Taraf&nbsp;(Davac\u0131) :Vekili\u0130stemin \u00d6zeti :Dan\u0131\u015ftay Onbe\u015finci Dairesi&#8217;nin&nbsp;21\/12\/2017&nbsp;tarih ve E:2017\/100, K:2017\/7696 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n\u0131n, hukuka uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclerek 2577 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130dari Yarg\u0131lama Usul\u00fc Kanununun 54. maddesi&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[67],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10984"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10984"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10984\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10985,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10984\/revisions\/10985"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10984"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10984"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10984"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}