In short
Denial compensation in enforcement is an item discussed by judgment as the money result of an unjust objection in enforcement without a judgment. Not every lost action produces compensation automatically. A dismissal does not build an operative provision so that it passes of itself into the compensation item.
This article separates who took a risk, on which route, and on which condition. Lifting of the objection is enforcement-court work tied to a document. There is no rate and no amount in this text. The item is not stated without the operative provision.
In which proceeding the compensation sits
In enforcement without a judgment, a timely objection as a rule stops the proceeding. The creditor chooses one of the lifting route or the annulment route in order to run the stopped file again. The denial-compensation debate arises in the annulment proceeding, where the claim is proved on the merits. On which day the objection is made is not in this text.
The objection petition does not end with saying I have no debt. A denial of the signature, jurisdiction, limitation, or a partial objection changes the ground of the compensation debate. The frame of a partial objection is followed from the article a partial objection. The creditor carries a risk as well. A claim of an unjust proceeding may come onto the agenda as the debtor's counter-request. The sentence that the creditor always receives compensation is wrong.
How injustice is read
The court looks at whether the objection sat on a justified ground in that file. A proceeding opened while there was no document, an uncertain balance, or an item already paid, may turn the assessment of injustice the other way. Compensation is the product of the judgment's reasoning, not of the creditor's anger. The item is not treated as born before the reasoning is written.
In a partial objection, which item was found unjust must be separated. If the principal, interest, costs, and the attorney's fee are crushed in the same bag, the operative provision cannot be applied. The request is written as concretely as the part that was objected to. How use is shown is followed from the article proof of use. A claim of bad faith is a separate sentence. Not every losing party is treated as acting in bad faith. It is not said that the denial was knowing, without evidence, correspondence, and a payment record.
The separation of lifting and annulment
Lifting rests on the documents the statute lists, and it is in the enforcement court. Annulment proves the existence of the claim more broadly in the ordinary court. A compensation judgment is not pasted onto these two doors with the same formula. If a lifting filed at the wrong door is dismissed, the annulment route may be put at risk. The order of trying lifting first, and annulment if it fails, is not safe in every file.
The choice of route is made before the nature of the document. A negative declaratory action is the debtor's action of "I am not the debtor". An interim order may affect the proceeding. It does not of itself erase the denial-compensation item. The two aims should not be melted in the same petition. How a negative declaratory action is filed is followed from the article a negative declaratory action. If a contract is the basis of the debt, it is placed in the annulment file separately.
How the item is read
This article looks at whether the compensation request was written openly in the annulment petition. This article separates the item awarded from the item requested. This article does not treat a dismissal in the lifting decision and the compensation in the annulment judgment as the same result. The two decisions stand side by side. One does not stand in for the other.
An Ankara lawyer who reads the item first asks for the provision of the annulment judgment. The office in Çankaya does not change the competent court. Jurisdiction is read from the kind of claim and from the rules of the place where the action was filed. The office address does not put the enforcement court in the place of the ordinary court. If the authority in the petition and the authority of the judgment conflict, the conflict is written.
Entering the judgment in the file
If compensation was awarded, it may be the subject of enforcement like the principal. Finality of the judgment, its entry in enforcement, and the balance account are looked at separately. There is no promise that what is written in the decision lands in the account. The rate is read from the current statute text and from the line of the judgment. Embedding a fixed rate in this article produces old information in a short time.
The tariff attorney's fee and denial compensation are not mixed. The attorney's fee is a separate line of the judgment. If the compensation item is melted inside the attorney's fee, the file cannot be applied. The enforcement office does not of itself add a rate that is not written in the judgment. An incomplete provision is not a completed request for enforcement. The document must show which item came out unjust.
Conclusion
Denial compensation in enforcement is the money face of an unjust objection in the file for annulment of the objection. It is not the automatic annex of every dismissal. Lifting and a negative declaratory action do not copy the same item. The general frame is on the enforcement and bankruptcy law page. The official basis is the text of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004. The rate is not stated without the concrete objection petition and the annulment judgment.