The Court Having Jurisdiction in Full Judgment Lawsuits Arising from Traffic Accidents
When the provisions of the eighth section of the Law No. 2918 on legal liability are evaluated together, the judicial jurisdiction has the jurisdiction to hear and resolve the lawsuits filed against all vehicle owners and operators, including those filed against public administrations and institutions as vehicle operators, due to accidents involving motor vehicles belonging to the State and other public institutions. However, since the services carried out by public administrations and institutions in order to ensure traffic safety and order, both in accordance with their own founding laws and the Highway Traffic Law No. 2918, have the characteristics of public service and the responsibilities of the public administrations and institutions assigned in the Law No. 2918 are not regulated separately; the trial and resolution of the lawsuits filed against the relevant administrations with the request for compensation for the damages allegedly arising from traffic order and safety services falls within the jurisdiction of the administrative jurisdiction.
As a result, the legal responsibility of the General Directorate of Highways arising from its duties determined in its founding law and repeated in the Law No. 2918, i.e. the public service it carries out in the form of road construction, maintenance, operation, and ensuring traffic safety, should be determined according to the principles and rules of administrative law; therefore, the full judgment cases to be filed for this reason should be resolved in administrative jurisdiction. From the examination of the case file, it is understood that the case under review on appeal was filed with the request for payment of the damage arising from the incident alleged to have occurred due to the lack of adequate precautions on the highway under the control of the defendant administration.
In this case, the dispute is not about the legal responsibility of the vehicle operator in private law, but about the Law No. 6001, which stipulates that the highways must be kept under constant maintenance, maintained, maintained, repaired, repaired, operated, operated, cleaned, inspected in a way to ensure their safe use, The claim arises from the allegation that the duties envisaged in the form of having the traffic safety and ensuring traffic safety are not fully and completely fulfilled, therefore, the services carried out are operated defectively and there is a service defect in the damage incurred, and accordingly, the trial and resolution of the case belongs to the administrative courts (Council of State 15. Chamber – Decision: 2015/1968).
