THE PLAINTIFF IS FOUND TO BE UNFAIR DUE TO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SHOWN VALUE OF THE REAL ESTATE AND THE ACTUAL VALUE AND THE POWER OF ATTORNEY FEE WILL NOT REQUIRE DECISIVENESS

T.C. SUPREME COURT 1.law office Main: 2014/200 Decision: 2014/12761 Date of Decision: 02.07.2014 TITLE CANCELLATION REGISTRATION AND COMPENSATION CASE –…

Okumaya Devam Et →

ACCORDING TO THE FACT THAT THE DEFENDANTS IN THE MERGED CASE ACCEPTED THE CASE AT THE FIRST HEARING WHERE THEY REPRESENTED THEMSELVES BY PROXY, IN THE ORIGINAL AND MERGED CASE, THE PROXY FEE MUST BE DIVIDED INTO TWO

T.C. SUPREME COURT 1.law office Based on: 2013/18150 Decision: 2014/4386 Date of Decision: 26.02.2014 ACCORDING TO THE FACT THAT THE…

Okumaya Devam Et →