Eşya hukuku ve yargı kararları açısından emval-i metrûke
Yükleniyor...
Dosyalar
Tarih
2012
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Osmanlı Devleti’nin Birinci Dünya Savaşı’na girmesi üzerine, iç
isyanların bastırılması amacıyla, kanun, nizamname ve diğer normlar
olarak bir dizi düzenleme yapılmıştır. Kabul edilen mevzuatta öngörülen
şartlara uyanlar, firarî ve mütegayyip olarak nitelendirilmiş, malları
emval-i metrûke (terk edilmiş mallar) kapsamında kabul edilerek el
konulmuştur. Ancak, usulüne uygun ülkeden ayrılanlar ile Lozan
Antlaşmasının yürürlüğe girmesinden sonra yurt dışına çıkanların malları
ise bu kapsamda değerlendirilmemiş ve el konulmamıştır. Diğer taraftan,
Cumhuriyet döneminde bu kimselerin malları ile ilgili olarak yeni
düzenlemeler yapılmış, ilânlar ve davetiyeler çıkarılmıştır. Bu davete
uyarak ülkeye geri dönenlerin malları iade edilmiştir. Ülkeye
dönmeyenlerin malları ise, 1928 yılına kadar emanette tutulmuş, bu
tarihten sonra bütçeye gelir kaydedilmiştir.
Bugünkü mevzuat ve Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin kararı açısından
emval-i metrûkenin 6 Ağustos 1924 tarihinden önceki sahiplerine iadesi
mümkün değildir. Bu konuda Yargıtay ve Danıştay’ın pek çok kararı
bulunmaktadır.
With Ottoman Empire getting into World War One, series of regulations as in laws, directories, and other statues have been put into effect to deal with inner riots. Those who compile with the conditions in the conventional law have been acknowledged as refugee and missing, and their belongings have confiscated by government as if they are disclaimed. However whose belongings that have left the country properly, and whose belongings that have left after Lausanne Treaty has been concluded have not acknowledged as disclaimed and confiscated. On the other hand, at the republican era new regulations relating those assets have been made, and notices, invitations have been put out. Assets of those who compiled with invitations have given back to their owners. Assets of those who did not compile with invitations and did not come back to get their belongings, has kept in safe custody until 1928, and after that date included into government budget. According to current positive law and a decision of Constitutional Court assets anymore cannot be returned to their owners before 6 August 1924. On this subject, Court of Appeals and Council of State have many decisions.
With Ottoman Empire getting into World War One, series of regulations as in laws, directories, and other statues have been put into effect to deal with inner riots. Those who compile with the conditions in the conventional law have been acknowledged as refugee and missing, and their belongings have confiscated by government as if they are disclaimed. However whose belongings that have left the country properly, and whose belongings that have left after Lausanne Treaty has been concluded have not acknowledged as disclaimed and confiscated. On the other hand, at the republican era new regulations relating those assets have been made, and notices, invitations have been put out. Assets of those who compiled with invitations have given back to their owners. Assets of those who did not compile with invitations and did not come back to get their belongings, has kept in safe custody until 1928, and after that date included into government budget. According to current positive law and a decision of Constitutional Court assets anymore cannot be returned to their owners before 6 August 1924. On this subject, Court of Appeals and Council of State have many decisions.
Açıklama
İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 3 (1).
Anahtar Kelimeler
Emval-i metrûke, Tapu sicilin aleniyeti, Kamu düzeni, Zamanaşımı ile iktisap, Lozan Antlaşması, Abandoned property, Publicity of land registry, Public policy, Prescription, Lausanne Treaty
Kaynak
İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
3
Sayı
1
Künye
Başpınar, V.,(2012).Eşya hukuku ve yargı kararları açısından emval-i metrûke.İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 3 (1).61-112 ss.
