In short
A decision of non-prosecution coming out about the physician does not mean the compensation action ended of itself. Non-prosecution is the decision that there is no ground for prosecution. It is not a judgment of acquittal. If the compensation file's own principal number stands, that file is not treated as closed by this decision. There is no period figure in this article.
The name of the decision and the reasoning line
The paper in the physician's hand is the decision that there is no ground for prosecution. Non-prosecution, in everyday language, is the name of this decision. The reasoning line writes that evidence that would form sufficient suspicion could not be obtained, or that there is no possibility of prosecution. The physician reads the reasoning that was printed. The reasoning is not read as the refusal of the compensation petition. If a medical sentence appears in the reasoning, that sentence is not the judgment of the civil court. The sentence stays inside the investigation decision.
If the decision stands on the same page about more than one person, each name is read on its own line. Non-prosecution about one physician does not mean non-prosecution for another name beside him. If the page wrote this separately, what was written separately is read. If the page did not separate them, the separation is not built from the reader's guess. The investigation number of the decision does not stand in for the principal number of the compensation file. If the two numbers stand on the same margin, both are written and they are not mixed.
If the decision writes that there is no ground for prosecution for one act, and that the investigation continues for another act, the two sentences stay separate. The act that continues is not written in the place of the act that closed. The act that closed is not treated as having covered the act that continues either. Which act stands in which sentence is read from the decision's own clauses. If there is no clause, the names inside a single paragraph are not mixed. If the heading of the decision is not that there is no ground for prosecution, the heading is not changed to non-prosecution. A paper that carries another name is read by its own name.
The administrative or disciplinary file inside the hospital is a third cover. The number of that cover is not the number of the decision of non-prosecution. The disciplinary file being open or closed does not end the compensation principal number, or the investigation decision, of itself. If three numbers are in hand, all three are written separately. If one is missing, the missing one is not assumed to exist.
The frame of a medical practice error is under medical malpractice. The name of the event in the decision does not build, in the place of that frame, a judgment that fault was found or was not found. The name of the event shows which act the investigation looked at. If the name of the act in the compensation file is different, the difference is not closed.
The piece of service and the margin of objection
If the decision was served on the physician, the piece of service stands. If there is no piece, news that "the file closed" is not treated as having closed the compensation principal number. A telephone, an internal writing of the institution, or a colleague's word does not hold the place of the piece of service. The date and the addressee's name are read on the piece. If the addressee is the institution, the institution's stamp is not treated as service on the physician himself. If a separate piece went out to the physician, that piece is read.
If a right of objection, a period, and an authority are written in the margin of the decision, those lines belong to the route of the person harmed by the offence. The physician does not write an objection petition on this page. The figure on the period line is not carried into this text. If the figure is not on the paper, a day is not invented. How the objection will be drafted is not here either. The patient's complaint authority is in the article a complaint process against a doctor. A public action on the same act coming onto the agenda again is not the subject of this text either. The decision does not of itself give the physician a sentence that "an investigation will not be opened again". If there is no such sentence on the paper, the sentence is not added.
The compensation file's own number
The action in the civil or administrative court carries a separate principal number. Non-prosecution does not erase that principal number. If the action has not been filed yet, the decision is not a result that the compensation request arose of itself, or fell, either. Whether the action was filed is read from the service in hand, or from the principal number. If there is no number, an action is not assumed to exist. The word "they will file" does not stand in for an action if a principal number does not stand.
Against whom the action will be directed is in the article against whom it is filed. The physician's name appearing in the decision of non-prosecution does not mean the compensation action will be filed only against that name either. If the institution's name does not appear in the decision, the institution is not treated as having stayed outside the action by this decision. If the institution's name does appear in the decision, this does not, on its own, write the list of defendants in the civil action either. The list is on the compensation file's own cover.
If the complainant's name in the decision and the claimant's name in the compensation file are different, the difference is not closed. Even if it is the same person, the two capacities stand separately in the two files. A report mentioned in the evidence paragraph of the decision has not entered the compensation file of itself. Whether the report stands on the other cover is read from the record of that cover. The evidence paragraph is not the reasoning of the civil judge. The medical sentence in the paragraph is not read as the refusal of the compensation request.
The general separation of the criminal route and the compensation route is in the article criminal proceedings and compensation. This text does not build that separation from the start. What is built is this: the paper in hand is an investigation decision. It does not stand in for the compensation petition. The heads of the request in the petition are not opened on this page. An amount is not written.
The acquittal line is looked for on this paper
Non-prosecution is not a court judgment. If the paper does not write acquittal, it is not counted as an acquittal. If a judgment that writes acquittal and this decision were put in the same folder, the two covers are read separately. The date of one does not stand in for the date of the other. The effect of an acquittal on the compensation file is in the article of the general separation. That effect is not recounted from the start here. A sentence in the reasoning of the decision of non-prosecution is not carried as the reasoning of a judgment of acquittal.
A decision that there is no ground for prosecution is not a decision that there is no ground for imposing a sentence either. Whichever name the paper carries, that name is read. The names are not used as each other's abbreviation. If a court page that builds a judgment and a prosecution decision stand in the same envelope, the envelope does not make the two a single result.
If the decision relates to one capacity of the physician and leaves another capacity outside the scope, the scope line is read. If there is no line, the decision is not treated as having spread to every duty of the physician. The spreading does not pass of itself to the list of defendants in the compensation file either. The list is on its own cover again. If an expert report is mentioned in the annex of the decision, the name that is mentioned is read. The result of the report is not copied as every sentence of the non-prosecution reasoning. If the reasoning rests on which sentence of the report, that sentence is read if it stands on the paper. If it does not stand, the result is not spread to the whole of the report.
The same epicrisis and the period line
The same epicrisis may stand both in the criminal folder and in the compensation folder. A decision of non-prosecution coming out in one does not take back the petition in the other. Which paper entered which number is read from the custody or sequence record of that file. If there is no record, the word "I sent it" is not counted as entry into the other file. Later changing a line in the epicrisis, or doing away with the paper, is not the subject of this article. What is read is on which cover the paper stands.
The period is read from the line shown in the decision. If there is no line, a day is not invented. Oral news that "the period passed" does not fill the blank line. This article does not put a day, a week, or a month. How fast the prosecution office gave the decision is not here either. The compensation file's own period line is not copied from the marginal note on the non-prosecution paper. The period of that file is looked for in the service of that file. If there is no service, the period is not completed from this text.
A petition submitted to the compensation file after the decision came out is not treated as having changed the decision itself. Whichever principal number the petition is registered to, it stands at that number. If the registration was not entered in the margin of the non-prosecution paper, it is not assumed to have been entered. The physician reads the dates of the two papers side by side. If one of the dates is not there, the one that is absent is not completed from the other. This reading side by side is not a judgment that one route closed the other. The judgment is looked for on each file's own cover.
"Evidence could not be obtained" being said in the reasoning of the decision is not read as if the epicrisis in hand did not exist. If the epicrisis stands in the folder, it stands. The reasoning writes whether that paper was assessed, or was not assessed, only if it writes it in its own sentence. If there is no sentence, an assessment is not assumed. An assessment that is not assumed does not bind the same epicrisis in the compensation file as a judgment either. The same page in the two folders stays as two separate readings.
The office in Çankaya does not choose the authority the file will go to.
Conclusion
Non-prosecution does not end the compensation action of itself. The decision is not a judgment of acquittal. The period is on the line in the decision, and it is not carried onto this page as a figure. The frame is on the health law page. If the decision and the compensation cover stand together, the assessment is made on those two papers through contact. The basis is the provision on there being no ground for prosecution in the Criminal Procedure Code numbered 5271.