{"id":3104,"date":"2020-05-20T01:14:41","date_gmt":"2020-05-19T22:14:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/alanya.law\/ru\/?p=3104"},"modified":"2020-05-20T01:15:36","modified_gmt":"2020-05-19T22:15:36","slug":"property-acquired-by-donation-is-personal-and-is-not-included-in-liquidation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/alanya.law\/ru\/blog\/alanya-lawyer-property-acquired-by-donation-is-personal-and-is-not-included-in-liquidation\/","title":{"rendered":"Property Acquired By Donation Is Personal And Is Not Included In Liquidation"},"content":{"rendered":"<!--themify_builder_content-->\n<div id=\"themify_builder_content-3104\" data-postid=\"3104\" class=\"themify_builder_content themify_builder_content-3104 themify_builder tf_clear\">\n    <\/div>\n<!--\/themify_builder_content-->\n\n\n<p>T.C SUPREME COURT <\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\" start=\"8\"><li>Legal Department<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p>Principal No: 2015\/7405<br>Decision No: 2017\/369<br>Decision Date: 17.01.2017<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>CASE FOR LIQUIDATION OF PROPERTY REGIME-CLERICAL NATURE<br>THE DEFENDANT&#8217;S ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY BY DONATION<br>PERSONAL PROPERTY AND NOT INCLUDED IN LIQUIDATION \u2013<br>DECISION BY ACCEPTANCE OF THE CLAIMANT&#8217;S CLAIM<br>IMPROPRIETY OF GIVING \u2013 CORRUPTION OF PROVISION<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Summary: Court, office in terms of property acquired by donation due to<br>the claimant shall receive the claimant&#8217;s personal property without regard to the fact that it is not included in the liquidation.<br>the decision on the acceptance of the request was against the procedure and the law, and required the annulment.<br>(6098 P. K. m. 285)<br>Case and decision: at the end of the proceedings between the parties and in the case described above<br>The court has decided to partially accept the case and partially reject the sentence and the defendant&#8217;s attorney<br>upon appeal by the Department, the file was examined and considered necessary.<br>The plaintiff \u2026 his attorney says his client served as a petty officer, while the defendant was a housewife and never<br>that it does not work, in marriage union, the price of which is paid by the plaintiff and purchased on behalf of the defendant<br>one recorded residence, one office and the bank account stated that the money was found in the goods<br>contribution, participation receivables and value, without prejudice to the rights related to excess and liquidation of the regime<br>he requested the collection of the increase share with interest and the cost is as 5.000,00 TL.<br>have been reported. 18.03.2014 with the petition for clarification, 500,00 TL in terms of Home, Office in terms of<br>Demand to be 3.000.00 TL, \u2026 750.00 TL in terms of money, 750.00 TL in terms of money in Bank Asya<br>announced the amounts of; 17.02.2015 with the petition for reclamation of the house where they duly paid the fees<br>in terms of 60,500. 00 TL, office in terms of 17,000.00 TL increased the amount of demand.<br>Defendant \u2026 the attorney, the cashing in on the ornaments worn at the wedding of the house subject to the lawsuit and the father of the defendant<br>that it was purchased with financial help, that the bureau was turned over to his daughter by the defendant&#8217;s father, and<br>the sale of the office with the money to renovate the house subject to lawsuit, the necessary expenses of the joint children and education<br>he argued that his expenses had been spent, and that he had no contribution in the acquisition of the plaintiff&#8217;s assets, and that the case had been dismissed.<br>The court will receive a contribution of TL 60,500.00 in terms of housing with the partial acceptance of the case, office<br>decision to take part of 17.000, 00 TL and 47.47 TL for bank accounts<br>the balance to be taken from the defendant and given to the plaintiff, together with the legal interest to be processed from the date of the date<br>the request is dismissed. The sentence was appealed by the defendant&#8217;s attorney during his term.<br>1 &#8211; File Contents, case documents, trial minutes and existing evidence<br>since the court has decided by discretion, in case there is no impropriety, the defendant<br>other appellate appeals by the deputy that fall outside the scope of the following bent have not been seen in place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>2-as for the appeals of the defendant&#8217;s attorney for the office;<br>The donation is regulated in articles 285 et al of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098. 285. By Article<br>Endowment (grant) is a non-gratuitous grant of the donor&#8217;s assets to the endowment, resulting in inter-provision results<br>it is defined as making a win. And the teaching is that the forgiving shall receive no recompense,<br>to provide an increase in the donor&#8217;s assets to enrich certain assets<br>his values have been described as giving him. (Aydo\u011fdu, Murat\/Kahveci Nalan: Turkish Law Of Obligations<br>Special relations, Izmir 2013, p. 344, Yavuz, Cevdet: special provisions of Turkish law of Obligations, 6. B., Istanbul<br>2002, p. 222).<br>According to the characteristics of each concrete event, the will to donate can be revealed clearly or in a secret (implicit) manner<br>it can be done. It is for this reason that some gains, even though they are similar to donations, are the only ones that earn.<br>it does not qualify as forgiveness because it is not done for the purpose of forgiveness. Devrene heavy<br>the purpose of the donation is to qualify the obliging earner as a donation; and<br>the Will has to be in such a way that there is no hesitation.<br>According to the settled practices of the Supreme Court and the Department, one of the spouses comes from their parents<br>in the case of goods, even if the sale is shown, the goods are considered as donations. This<br>the saving transaction is considered a donation as a de facto presumption according to the usual course of life. The presumption<br>to prove otherwise, that is to say, the wife who claims to have been bought in the real sense by giving her money<br>obliged. This accepted presumption changes the party under the obligation of proof. Mother or<br>the spouse who claims that the saving on the property from the father is not a donation but a real sale,<br>his claim is strong and credible, especially the payment records regarding the payment of the sale price.<br>he must prove it with evidence.<br>As for the concrete dispute; the parties, married on 16.05.1995, opened on 17.09.2012<br>they were divorced when the provision for the adoption of the divorce case was finalized on 20.02.2014.<br>In the title deed of Office 7, subject to liquidation, the defendant&#8217;s father is registered in the name of non-litigation\u2026.<br>while the marriage was registered in the name of the defendant through sale on 03.09.2007, 03.08.2012<br>in its history, the deed was transferred to a third party out of the case by way of sale.<br>If the court considers the office as the defendant&#8217;s acquired property and decides to claim it in favor of the plaintiff,<br>de justification does not coincide with the scope of the file. Above this transfer from father to defendant<br>as can be understood from the principles described, it should be accepted as a donation. The burden of proving the contrary of this actual presumption<br>he&#8217;s on the plaintiff&#8217;s side. The plaintiff party purchased the bureau from the defendant&#8217;s father, although the money was paid<br>even if it claims to have been taken, it cannot be proved from the file scope that the sales transaction is real<br>it is understood.Court, Office of the defendant due to the acquisition of the property in terms of donations<br>claim of the claimant party without considering that it is his personal property and cannot be included in the liquidation<br>the decision in writing with its acceptance was against the procedure and the law,and required to be annulled.<br>Conclusion: for the reasons shown in Paragraph (2) above, the respondent&#8217;s attorney has written<br>provisional 3 of HMK No. 6100 of the provision, with the adoption of Appeal appeals seen in place. substance<br>HUMKnun 428 by submission. above other appellate objections to its impairment under the clause<br>(1). for the reason shown in the paragraph 366\/3 of the ICJ by the parties. Department of the Supreme Court in accordance with article<br>request for a correction of the decision can be made within 10 days of the notification of the declaration and<br>it was decided unanimously on 17.01.2017 to return the advance fee upon request.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>T.C SUPREME COURT Legal Department Principal No: 2015\/7405Decision No: 2017\/369Decision Date: 17.01.2017 CASE FOR LIQUIDATION OF PROPERTY REGIME-CLERICAL NATURETHE DEFENDANT&#8217;S ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY BY DONATIONPERSONAL PROPERTY AND NOT INCLUDED IN LIQUIDATION \u2013DECISION BY ACCEPTANCE OF THE CLAIMANT&#8217;S CLAIMIMPROPRIETY OF GIVING \u2013 CORRUPTION OF PROVISION Summary: Court, office in terms of property acquired by donation [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[16,2921,22,17,6033],"yst_prominent_words":[5753,6034,6025,732,4634,6030,6029,6032,69,6027,5831,283,3083,76,3585,6031,1919,6028,6024,6026],"class_list":["post-3104","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-alanya-lawyer","tag-alanya","tag-antalya","tag-law","tag-lawyer","tag-liquidation","has-post-title","has-post-date","has-post-category","has-post-tag","has-post-comment","has-post-author",""],"builder_content":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/alanya.law\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3104","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/alanya.law\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/alanya.law\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alanya.law\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alanya.law\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3104"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/alanya.law\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3104\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/alanya.law\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3104"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alanya.law\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3104"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alanya.law\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3104"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/alanya.law\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=3104"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}