İcra ve iflâs hukukunda gecikmiş itiraz
Late objection in the law of execution and bankruptcy
Yazar: ALPER UYUMAZ
Danışman: PROF. DR. ÖMER ULUKAPI
Selçuk Üniversitesi / Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü / Özel Hukuk Ana Bilim Dalı
Derece: Yüksek Lisans, 2005
Konu: Hukuk = Law

Özet:
Borçlunun, hakkındaki takip açısından hayatî değer taşıyan ödeme emrine itiraz süresini kusursuz olarak, kendi iradesi dışında meydana gelen bir sebepten ötürü kaçırması durumunda, menfaatlerin telifini esas alan kanunkoyucu, İcra ve İflâs Kanununun 65. maddesi ile gecikmiş itiraz müessesesine yer vermeyi uygun bulmuştur. İcra ve İflâs Hukukunda, ödeme emrine itiraz süresini kaçırmanın ve bu durumun hak düşürücü özelliğinin tek istisnası gecikmiş itiraz müessesesidir. Zira, ödeme emrine itiraz süresini kusuruna dayanmayan kabul edilebilir bir mazereti sebebiyle kaçıran bir borçlunun, kesinleşmiş takibi durdurabilmesinin tek yolu gecikmiş itirazda bulunmaktır. Bu bakımdan, gecikmiş itirazın hukukî, niteliğinin, İcra ve iflâs Hukuku anlamında bir hukuksal çare olduğu kabul edilebilmektedir. Gecikmiş itiraz talebinde bulunmak tek başına takibi durdurmazsa da, ödeme emrine itirazın kaçırılmasına sebep gösterilen mazeretin incelemeyi yapan mercii tarafından kabulü ile birlikte takip duracaktır. Ancak, incelemeyi yapan mercii, duruma göre ihtiyatî tedbir niteliğindeki bir karar ile de, daha gecikmiş itiraza ilişkin talebi incelemeye başlamadan taklibi durdurabilir. Ayrıca, incelemeyi yapan merciin, kanunda sınırlı şekilde sayılmış mazeret sebepleriyle bağlı olmaması da müesseseye ayrı bir özgünlük kazandırmaktadır. Gecikmiş itiraza ilişkin kanunî düzenlemenin, mazeret ve itiraz sebeplerinin yetkili ve görevli mercie birlikte verilmesi, duruşma ilişkin harç ve masrafların da peşinen yatırılmış olmasını şart koşması bakımından gecikmiş itirazın bir an önce karara bağlanması amacını gütmekte olduğu söylenebilir. Hemen belirtmek gerekir ki, İcra Hukukunda olduğu gibi, İflas Hukukunda da uygulanabilirliği tartışmasız olan gecikmiş itiraz müessesesine, kambiyo senetlerine mahsus takip hukuku açısından özel olarak yer verilmiş olması, adî iflas yoluyla takiplerde müessesenin uygulanma kabiliyetine sahip olmadığı şeklinde yorumlanmamalıdır. Son olarak, açık bir kanun hükmü olmamasına rağmen, gecikmiş itiraza talebine ilişkin olarak ilgili merciin verdiği karara karşı üst yargı denetimine, bu anlamda temyiz ve karar düzeltme yollarına başvurulabilmesine bir engel olmadığı belirtilmelidir.

Abstract:
In law practice, financial problems between parties have a special value. On account of this, codes which include economical substantials are being studied as research subjects. The most considerable of that codes which involve these features is The Code of Execution and Bankruptcy. A lot of prescription periods are foreseen at the Code of Execution and Bankruptcy. Because the Code of Execution and Bankruptcy saves creditor's benefits and provides pulling in cash his credit promptly. By the way, the code also conserves debitor's benefits. One of the examples of this at the Turkish Law of Execution and Bankruptcy is the late objection. Actually, late objection helps to the debtor, when he missed seven day prescription period. The late objection is the only exception of the objection period. Late objection concept is put in order article sixty-five and one hundred seventy-four (paragraph four) at Turkish Execution and Bankruptcy Act. 
This research which embraces late objection in the law of execution and bankruptcy has consisted of four paragraphs. The first paragraph's primary topic is about the definition of the late objection. The secondary topic here is about the practice of the late objection in the law of execution and bankruptcy. After this topic, the juridical meaning of late objection takes place in the last topic in this paragraph. The terms of the late objection demand are explained in the second paragraph. The whole paragraph includes five fundamental terms of the late objection. All terms are explained with details in here. The third paragraph is about the juridical consequences of the late objection demand. Acceptance and refusal of the late objection demand are placed at this paragraph. Appeal request about the late objection judgment is expressed end of the paragraph. Also, this paragraph tells correction of adjustment. At the conclusion paragraph, the concept of late objection is censured with negative and constructive aspects in the light of de lege ferenda.
According to Turkish Execution and Bankruptcy Act, the objection period to the order of payment is seven days. This period starts when debtor gets writing noticed. If the debtor does not object to order of payment in this period, the execution proceeding comes finally. Hereafter, the only way of cutting down foregoing proceeding is late objection demand. But, the term of the head to late objection demand is to be free from the fault of the debtor. Also, the debtor must have an excuse, like being in severe illness. Compelling reasons and unexpected events are rates as an excuse for late objection, too. In this respect, the late objection is accepted as a legal remedy. Essentially, with late objection demand, foregoing proceeding does not stop. Before all else, the court which takes the objection demand can adjudge to cut down the proceeding with the temporary injunction. If the court does not adjudge a temporary injunction about this demand, execution or bankruptcy proceeding does not stop. Whenever the excuse is accepted by the court, the foregoing proceeding is cut down. In this case, the court can accept the excuse or refuse the excuse. Because, Turkish Execution and Bankruptcy Act article sixty-five, gives to judge a judicial discretion. Thanks to this, in all the present cases, the judge can adjudge different decisions. Furthermore, the judge can investigate this demand at a trial or only on a document basis. With this assistance, time loss can be blocked. However, the debtor must put forward objections to order of payment with the late objection demand. Herein, the aim is barring time loss. With the same reason, article sixty-five involves paying all expenses of trial. This is one of the terms of late objection demand according to article sixty-five. The payment of trial expenses before the judge decides to give a hearing is can be criticized. Scarcely, this term increases the speed of judgment.
 The late objection can be used in the law of execution. It is also can be used in the law of bankruptcy. This estimation is argued from Turkish Execution and Bankruptcy Act article 65 and 173/4 clearly. But, there is a discussion here. Because Turkish Execution and Bankruptcy Act subject that late objection is possible bankruptcy proceeding about the commercial set. On the other hand, the act does not subject whether the late objection is possible or not about the general bankruptcy proceeding. According to doctrine and case, law debtor can use late objection right in spite of there is no clause in the Execution and Bankruptcy Act. Therefore, there are some fundamental terms of late objection demand. Before everything, the debtor must have an excuse. And this acceptable excuse must have been prevented his objection to the ordering of payment. Besides, the debtor must be free from fault. If he has a fault about missing objection period, he can not use this right. In one go, the debtor must present his late objection brief to the venue. At last, trial expenses must have been paid by the debtor. When does the debtor present his late objection demand to the venue? He has two-time limits here. He must present his late objection demand in three days. This period starts when the excuse disappears. The other time limit is about the upper limit. Under the circumstances, the debtor must present late objection until converting into money pledged goods. This upper time limit changes in the law of bankruptcy. In here, the debtor can present his late objection demand until commercial court adjudges debitor's bankruptcy. The late objection is not similar to the case of unmethodical notification. For using late objection right, the debtor must miss seven days objection period and the late objection is his last chance. But in this case, the debtor does not know the order of payment. In the case of the unmethodical notification, the period for the order of payment does not start. If the debtor has heard the notification, the objection period starts at this time. Once at for all, parties of execution or bankruptcy proceeding can appeal with the Supreme Court for the adjudgment of the local court. There is no article in the Turkish Execution and Bankruptcy Act about the appeal. Certainly, right about the appeal is an inalienable right. Just because of this, not only doctrine but also caselaw believe that parties appeal the judgment of court about late objection demand. In the meantime, the parties of execution or bankruptcy proceeding can want correction of adjustment from Supreme Court, too.