Bonoda defilerin sınıflandırılması
Başlık çevirisi mevcut değil.
- Tez No: 37292
- Danışmanlar: DOÇ.DR. NURKUT İNAN
- Tez Türü: Yüksek Lisans
- Konular: Çalışma Ekonomisi ve Endüstri İlişkileri, Hukuk, Labour Economics and Industrial Relations, Law
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Defiler, Senetler, Pleas, Bills
- Yıl: 1994
- Dil: Türkçe
- Üniversite: Ankara Üniversitesi
- Enstitü: Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü
- Ana Bilim Dalı: Belirtilmemiş.
- Bilim Dalı: Belirtilmemiş.
- Sayfa Sayısı: Belirtilmemiş.
Özet
Özet yok.
Özet (Çeviri)
- SUMMARY - TTK( Turkish Commercial Code) has arrenged the peremptory and objections under the sub-topic“Pleas”without making any differentiation in tech nical meaning. By this arrangement, the law-maker has not reduced the objections to the level of peremptory pleas. The judge shall examine the peremptory pleas which is qualified as objection, it is understood from the file, intrinsically. In TTK, peremptory pleas has been arranged in three categories as pleas that makes the bill invalid, pleas that makes the debt in bills invalid, and individual pleas. In our study, since the pleas are the means of de fence, we have adopted the Absolute pleas, comparative pleas type of ca tegorisation by considering to whom they may be used against rather than where it is arised. The most important features of. absolute pleas is that they, çan be asserted against anybody. The items which does not contain the conditions of 688th and 689th articles of TTK and whose presence makes the bill invalid, are examples of absolute pleas. But, the comparative pleas should be asserted against persons who act harmfully against the debtor intentionally with malice or with serious fault or between immediate parties. Obtaining of sto len bill, the preparation of a partially bill against the agreement accommo dation plea, lack of consideration, shall be given as examples of comparative pleas. While the pleas concerning the validity of the bills as absolute pleas, shall be asserted by anybody against all bearers. The person may assert not to accept the debt due to incapasity, lack of authority to represent etc. Other debtorshas no right to avoid payment asserting these pleas. The malice or good intention of the bearer has no importance in absolute pleas. The above- mentioned matter may be asserted in conditions ih which acquisition of bearer with malice of heavy fault causing loss of debtor intentionally, exist. The whole of absolute pleas are not qualified as objection and those that is not qualified as objection may be taken into consideration provided that they are asserted by parties. As for the comparative pleas, these are pleas in the technical meaning. They may, only, be asserted by parties. #$5 9» <pM\
Benzer Tezler
- Bütçe açıklarının finansmanında iç borçlanmanın yeri ve etkileri -Türkiye ekonomisi üzerine ekonometrik bir çalışma-
Başlık çevirisi yok
METİN DEMİRAY
