Date of Decision: 14.07.2016
THE CASE OF COLLECTION OF THE ASSIGNMENT RECEIVABLES – THE NEED TO JUDGE THE FEES AND ATTORNEY’S FEES IN CASES AS VICTIMS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MINIMUM WAGE TARIFF OF THE LAWYER – THE BANKRUPTCY COURT IS HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RELATIVE ATTORNEY’S FEE – THE VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION
ABSTRACT: Registration acceptance cases are related to the request to register the receivable at the bankruptcy table; Since it is not intended to pay a certain amount, the fee and power of attorney in these cases must be ruled as the victim in accordance with the Minimum Wage Tariff of the Lawyer. Although the court decided to accept the registration, it required the provision to be overturned because it was not correct to hold the bankruptcy court responsible for the relative proxy fee.
(6100 pp. K. Late. m. 3)
Case and Decision: Plaintiff .. Metal and Construction. Renown. Tic. Ltd. Şti. defendants with 1-.. Construction joint stock companies . Bankruptcy Administration 2-… 3-.. bankruptcy administration officers of joint stock companies 1-Lawyer .. 2-.. 3-.. because of the lawsuit between Dec.. Issued by the Commercial Court of First Instance.. days and .. our Apartment, which has approved the numbered provision.. days and .. the plaintiff and the defendant are acting as plaintiffs against the numbered decree.. construction joint stock companies. It was understood that the decision was requested to be corrected by the deputy Bankruptcy Administration and the decision correction petitions were granted within the period of time, but the papers in the file were read and considered as necessary:
The lawsuit was filed with the request to decide on the collection of the collateral receivable, the court will reject the lawsuit against the defendant, and the other defendants will accept the collection from the defendants that you will receive from the acceptance of the collection, provided that it does not recur in the collection..joint stock companies. It was decided to register with the Bankruptcy Table, the decision was made between the plaintiff and the defendant …. after the appeal made by the Bankruptcy Administration of joint stock companies, the appeal requests were rejected and approved by our Department, and the file was re-examined with the request of the plaintiff and defendant bankruptcy administration to correct the decision.
1-According to the articles in the file, the reasons specified in the court decision and adopted in the decision of the Supreme Court, all the plaintiff’s requests for correction of other decisions that fall outside the scope of the following paragraph of the defendant bankruptcy administration should be rejected.
2-From the court’s decision, the plaintiff will receive 117,000.00 TL, which he received from the contractor.. due to the fact that construction joint stock companies have gone bankrupt, the execution has turned into a registration acceptance case in accordance with Articles 235 and further of the Bankruptcy Code, and since the bankruptcy decision has also been finalized, it has been decided to register the bet on the bankruptcy table that you will receive with a bet. Registration acceptance cases are related to the request to register the receivable at the bankruptcy table; Since it is not intended to pay a certain amount, the fee and power of attorney in these cases must be ruled as the victim in accordance with the Minimum Wage Tariff of the Lawyer. Although the court decided to accept the registration, it is not correct to hold the bankruptcy court liable for the relative proxy fee, and since this does not require a retrial, it must be corrected and approved, while it is understood in the review conducted this time that the decision was approved, the defendant accepted the bankruptcy administration’s request to correct the decision and the section of the provision paragraph 6100 on the relative proxy fee of the temporary 3 of the HMK. according to Article 438/VII of HUMK No. 1086. it has been found appropriate to be corrected and approved in accordance with the article.
Conclusion: The above 1. all of the plaintiffs for the reasons described in I, the defendant …. refusal of joint stock companies from other decision correction requests of the Bankruptcy Table, 2. in accordance with paragraph 1 of the decision of the bankruptcy administration of the defendant with the acceptance of the request for correction of our apartment.. days and .. Decision No. 7 of the court decision partially repealing the approval decision. in the subparagraph “Defendants .. in accordance with the Minimum Wage Tariff for lawyers, the defendant received a power of attorney fee of 1,500.00 TL by removing the section ”Bankruptcy table of joint stock companies“ and continuing the same paragraph ….to collect joint stock companies from the Bankruptcy Table and pay them to the plaintiff, to write the word index “and to CORRECT and APPROVE the provision in this amended form, 442 of the HUMK. in accordance with Article 248.00, a fine of TL 3.20 will be imposed on the plaintiff who wants to correct the decision of the defendant who wants to correct the decision, the appeal and decision correction advance fees paid by the defendant who wants to correct the decision on request with a fine of TL 248.00.. joint stock companies It was unanimously decided on 14.07.2016 to return joint stock companies to the Bankruptcy Administration.