In short
The question of how a jurisdiction objection is made in enforcement asks, from the papers, whether this office is competent. What is said when one looks up how a jurisdiction objection is made in enforcement is this: against the payment order or the enforcement papers, this office is not competent. It is not the same mould as an objection to the debt or to the amount. There is no promise of a period or of a result. A day count is not memorised.
Domicile and the contract are read apart
If the debtor thinks enforcement was opened in a place contrary to the domicile, or to the jurisdiction rule the Act attaches, the jurisdiction route is weighed. If the contract has a jurisdiction clause, it is read separately. Not every clause is treated as valid. The place name in the contract does not erase, of its own accord, the link the Act indicates. The paper on which the clause is written is placed side by side with the enforcement papers. If there is no paper, it is not announced that a clause exists.
Domicile is not closed in a single word from an identity or service address. Which address is read for jurisdiction changes with the type of enforcement. This text does not write a list of addresses. The address in the file, the place in the contract, and the link the Act indicates stand separately. One is not copied in place of another. The decision reads from the petition which link is raised.
Enforcement on a judgment is separated from enforcement without one
In enforcement on a judgment, the jurisdiction frame can work differently from enforcement without a judgment. The name of the paper is the first distinction. A sentence built against a payment order does not stick, as it is, onto an enforcement order. In a file on a judgment, the place where the court decision was given and the place of the enforcement office are not confused. The judgment is not the sentence of an objection to the debt inside a jurisdiction objection. A mould is not chosen before the name of the document is read.
An Ankara lawyer who reads the enforcement papers does not treat the Çankaya address as the competent office. The office being in Çankaya does not choose the enforcement office. The competent office does not come out of the district of the firm. The district name does not take the place of the debtor’s domicile or of the clause in the contract. The office address does not produce the objection period either. The period is read from service and from the text of the order itself.
The result of an objection to the debt is different
It is possible to write, in the same petition, both that there is no debt and that the office lacks jurisdiction. The results are separate. If jurisdiction is accepted, the file can be sent to the competent place. An objection to the debt opens the debate on the claim. The two are not joined in the same sentence. Accepting jurisdiction is not accepting the debt. Debating the debt does not correct the office’s jurisdiction of its own accord either.
A partial objection is directed at part of the amount. A jurisdiction objection is not a calculation of the amount. A reservation on the amount is not written in place of a reservation on the place. The petition should make clear which sentence is jurisdiction and which sentence is the debt. If it is not clear, the results mix. That mixing does not arise in the same form in every file. The text is read from the headings on the papers.
Irregular service is a separate intention
The date of service, the type of order, and the channel of objection depend on the concrete paper. The channel can be the office or the court. Which one is open in this file is read from the service. A claim of irregular service is a separate intention. Saying service was not made is not saying the office lacks jurisdiction. The two claims can stand in the same envelope. One does not change the other’s day of its own accord. There is no day from memory.
The complaint route is not the short name of a jurisdiction objection. A complaint is directed at an act of the enforcement office. A jurisdiction objection is directed at territorial jurisdiction. The name of the paper shows which door is open. The door is not chosen from the district where the office sits. The Çankaya office does not change the competent place.
The jurisdiction sentence and the debt sentence carry separate headings in the petition. A place name is not a calculation of the amount. A clause written in the contract is not closed as valid in every file. The validity of the clause is read separately. The address of the office is not written in place of this clause.
The office is not chosen from the firm
The objection is directed at the territorial jurisdiction of the office. This article does not take this sentence for an objection to the debt. This article does not make the district of the firm the competent office either. The clause in the contract is read separately. A day count is not in this text.
Conclusion
A jurisdiction objection is a defence directed at the territorial jurisdiction of the office. Which office is competent is in the competent office, an objection to the debt is in objecting to enforcement, reading the order is in the payment order, and a reservation on the amount is in a partial objection. The frame is on the enforcement and bankruptcy law page. The basis is the text of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code No. 2004. A route is not chosen without the original papers.