12. Legal Department
Principal No: 2011/3369
Decision No: 2011/19386
K. Date: 17.10.2011
The date and number of the court decision written above, within the period of the appeal examination of the debtor requested by the file on this work was sent to the apartment was read and discussed and considered as necessary. :
By creditor Gaziosmanpasa 2. It is observed that the Family Court has started execution proceedings based on the divorce decree No. 2007/1262, 2010/252 dated 09.03.2010, that the collection of Fer receivables and monthly poverty of TL 300,00 and associate alimony of TL 250,00 is requested, that in the debtor’s application to the execution court, fer receivables can not be executed without divorce being finalized,
Follow-up basis in the decree, it is understood that TL 150 each monthly injunction alimony in favor of the common child and the claimant principal continues until the decision is finalised, TL 300,00 poverty and TL 250,00 associate alimony are ruled after the provision is finalised.
In this case, a monthly total of TL 300.00 may be requested until the divorce provision is finalized in accordance with the decree.
Humk’s 443/4. in accordance with the provisions of the law of the family and the person can not be subject to follow-up unless they are finalised. In addition, the provisions of the divorce decree for compensation, attorney’s fees and trial expenses are also subject to the same rule. However, if the divorce decree is finalized, it is not necessary for the claims for compensation, power of attorney and trial costs to be finalized in order to be followed (HGK). 28.2.2001 on 2001/12-206E. 2001/217 K. ).
Humk’s 443/3. in accordance with the article, while it is not necessary for the decree to be finalized in terms of the measure alimony, it is necessary for the divorce provision to be finalized in order to claim the poverty and contribution alimony.If the divorce is finalized, the date of the divorce should be asked by the relevant court and a decision should be made according to the result that will occur after the determination of the written provision based on incomplete examination is inconclusive.
Conclusion: the court’s decision with the acceptance of the debtor’s appeal Appeals for reasons written above IIK 366 and Humk 428. in accordance with the articles (of dissolution), a unanimous decision was made on 17/10/2011.