Amount of Compensation in Case of Full Judgment Action Filed Together with the Annulment Action
Article 3 of the Administrative Trial Procedure Law No. 2577 Article 3 of the Law No. 2577 on Administrative Procedure stipulates that administrative lawsuits shall be filed with signed petitions addressed to the Council of State, administrative courts and tax courts, that the petitions shall include the names, surnames or titles and addresses of the parties and their attorneys or representatives, if any, the subject matter and reasons of the lawsuit and the evidence on which it is based, the date of the written notification of the administrative action subject to the lawsuit, the amount in dispute in full judgment cases, and that the number of petitions and copies of the documents attached to them shall be one more than the number of opposing parties.
In this case; if a claim for compensation is made together with the request for annulment, the amount to be decided to be compensated should be clearly and completely stated and the lawsuit should be filed by depositing the fees over this amount, while the lawsuit petition is contrary to Article 3 of the Law No. 2577 due to the request to decide to pay the receivable arising from the transaction together with legal interest, and if a full judicial lawsuit is filed together with the request for annulment, it is necessary to file a lawsuit again by writing the amount requested to be compensated in full and stating the reasons for this amount, with petitions signed by one more than the number of opposing parties. For the reasons explained; In accordance with Article 15/1-d of the Administrative Procedure Law No. 2577, it has been decided to reject the petition to file a lawsuit within 30 days after the notification of this decision in accordance with Article 3, and to notify the plaintiff that the lawsuit will be rejected if the same mistake is made in the petition re-submitted upon the rejection of the petition in accordance with Article 15/5 of the same Law.( 13th Chamber of the Council of State – Decision: 2015/4231).
