T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
FERHAT K\u00dc\u00c7\u00dcK BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/19910)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 24\/10\/2024<\/p>\n
R.G. Tarih ve Say\u0131: 7\/3\/2025 – 32834<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Basri BA\u011eCI<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Engin YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
\u015eahap KAYMAK<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Ferhat K\u00dc\u00c7\u00dcK<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Burak SUCAKLI<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 <\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, i\u015fe iade talebiyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n dava \u00f6ncesinde arabulucuya ba\u015fvurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan reddedilmesi nedeniyle mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucu, \u00f6zel bir firmada \u015fof\u00f6r olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmaktayken i\u015f akdinin feshedilmesi \u00fczerine \u0130stanbul 5. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesinde (Mahkeme) i\u015f akdinin ge\u00e7erli bir neden olmaks\u0131z\u0131n feshi iddias\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak feshin ge\u00e7ersizli\u011finin tespiti ile i\u015fe iade davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. Mahkeme; davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne, daval\u0131 i\u015fverence yap\u0131lan feshin ge\u00e7ersizli\u011fine ve ba\u015fvurucunun i\u015fe iadesine karar vermi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucunun yasal s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde ba\u015fvurmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen daval\u0131 i\u015fverence s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde i\u015fe ba\u015flat\u0131lmamas\u0131 h\u00e2linde \u00f6denmesi gereken tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurucunun d\u00f6rt ayl\u0131k \u00fccreti olan br\u00fct 11.530,68 TL olarak tespitine, karar\u0131n kesinle\u015fmesine kadar en \u00e7ok d\u00f6rt ayl\u0131k \u00fccret ve di\u011fer haklar\u0131 i\u00e7in net 10.295,13 TL’nin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00f6denmesi gerekti\u011finin tespitine, fesih s\u0131ras\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucuya k\u0131dem ve ihbar tazminat\u0131 \u00f6denmi\u015f ise s\u00f6z konusu tazminat miktarlar\u0131n\u0131n bu alacaklardan mahsubuna h\u00fckmetmi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde; ba\u015fvurucunun iade garantisi olan \u00fcr\u00fcnleri iade almak istemeyerek m\u00fc\u015fteri ile gereksiz tart\u0131\u015fmaya girdi\u011finden bahisle 22\/5\/2003 tarihli ve 4857 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u015f Kanunu’nun 25. maddesi gere\u011fince i\u015f akdinin feshedildi\u011fini ancak ba\u015fvurucuya i\u015fledi\u011fi fiil nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucu i\u00e7in daha hafif bir tedbirin uygulanmas\u0131 imk\u00e2n\u0131 varken bu yolun tercih edilmeyerek ba\u015fvurucunun i\u015f akdinin feshedilmesinin \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu ve daval\u0131 i\u015fverence feshe son \u00e7are olarak ba\u015fvurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re daval\u0131 i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan feshin hakl\u0131 ve ge\u00e7erli bir nedenle yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ispat edilemedi\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Daval\u0131 i\u015fveren taraf\u0131ndan bu karara kar\u015f\u0131 istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 27. Hukuk Dairesince (B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi) daval\u0131n\u0131n istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun kabul\u00fc ile mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan davan\u0131n reddine kesin olarak karar verilmi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde; dava \u015fart\u0131 olan arabulucuya ba\u015fvurunun kapsam\u0131 ve \u015feklinin 2\/6\/2018 tarihli ve 30439 say\u0131l\u0131 Resm\u00ee Gazete’de yay\u0131mlanan Hukuk Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131nda Arabuluculuk Kanunu Y\u00f6netmeli\u011fi’nde (Y\u00f6netmelik) d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Yarg\u0131tay taraf\u0131ndan bu kapsamda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klara ili\u015fkin olarak ba\u015fvuru formu uygulamas\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 2\/6\/2018 tarihinin esas al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2\/6\/2018 tarihinden sonraki ba\u015fvurularda ba\u015fvuran ve g\u00f6revli memurun ba\u015fvuru formundaki bu t\u00fcr eksiklikleri giderecek uyar\u0131larda bulunmas\u0131 ve form i\u00e7eri\u011fine itibar edilmesi gerekti\u011finin kabul edildi\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Somut olayda Y\u00f6netmelik’in yay\u0131mland\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihten sonra arabuluculu\u011fa ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131 nedeniyle form i\u00e7eri\u011fine itibar edilmesi gerekti\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Arabuluculuk ba\u015fvuru formunda \u00fccret, fazla mesai, y\u0131ll\u0131k \u00fccretli izin, k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131, ihbar tazminat\u0131, ayr\u0131mc\u0131l\u0131k tazminat\u0131, k\u00f6t\u00fc niyet tazminat\u0131, haks\u0131z fesih tazminat\u0131, manevi tazminat ve i\u015f arama izni \u00fccreti kalemlerinin i\u015faretlendi\u011fi, arabuluculuk b\u00fcrosu taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen ve ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan imzalanan formda da “i\u015f\u00e7i i\u015fveren ili\u015fkisinden kaynaklanan (nispi)” ve “Ba\u015fvuru dilek\u00e7esinde yer alan t\u00fcm a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 okuyup anlad\u0131m.” ibarelerinin bulundu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucunun i\u015fe iade talebi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden dava \u015fart\u0131 olan arabuluculu\u011fa ba\u015fvurmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmesinde bulunulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvurucu, nihai h\u00fckm\u00fc 10\/3\/2020 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra 30\/6\/2020 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur. 25\/3\/2020 tarihli ve 7226 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun ile COVID-19 pandemisi nedeniyle yarg\u0131 alan\u0131ndaki s\u00fcreler 13\/3\/2020 tarihinden 15\/6\/2020 tarihine kadar durduruldu\u011fundan ba\u015fvurunun s\u00fcresinde oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fvurucu; arabuluculuk ba\u015fvuru formunu ilgili arabuluculuk b\u00fcrosunda g\u00f6revli memurlar\u0131n y\u00f6nlendirmesi ile doldurdu\u011funu, i\u015fe iade talebinin arabuluculuk m\u00fczakerelerine konu edildi\u011finin son tutanakta yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu nedenle dava \u015fart\u0131 olan arabuluculu\u011fa ba\u015fvurdu\u011funu iddia etmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca arabuluculuk s\u00fcrecinin arabuluculuk ba\u015fvuru formu ile k\u0131s\u0131tland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, b\u00f6ylece fiilen yeni bir dava \u015fart\u0131 olu\u015fturuldu\u011funu belirterek adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
8. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi bilgi i\u00e7in Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9. Ba\u015fvuru, mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. A\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilmesini gerektirecek ba\u015fka bir neden de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
11. Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda, herkesin yarg\u0131 mercileri \u00f6n\u00fcnde davac\u0131 veya daval\u0131 olarak iddiada bulunma ve savunma hakk\u0131na sahip oldu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131, Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan hak arama \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn bir unsurudur (\u00d6zbak\u0131m \u00d6zel Sa\u011fl\u0131k Hiz. \u0130n\u015f. Tur. San. ve Tic. Ltd. \u015eti., B. No: 2014\/13156, 20\/4\/2017, \u00a7 34).<\/p>\n
12. \u0130\u015fe iade davas\u0131n\u0131n dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan reddedilmesi suretiyle uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n esas\u0131n\u0131n incelenmemesi mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131na m\u00fcdahale te\u015fkil etmektedir. Hak arama \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne yap\u0131lan bu m\u00fcdahale Anayasa’n\u0131n 13. maddesinde belirtilen \u015fartlara (kanun taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclme, hakl\u0131 bir sebebe dayanma ve \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmama) uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinin ihlalini te\u015fkil edecektir. Ba\u015fvuru konusu olayda arabulucuya ba\u015fvurma dava \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131lanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle verilen usulden ret karar\u0131yla yap\u0131lan m\u00fcdahalenin kanun taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclme \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131, karar gerek\u00e7esinde dayan\u0131lan 12\/10\/2017 tarihli ve 7036 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u015f Mahkemeleri Kanunu’nun 3. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131ndan anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. S\u00f6z konusu f\u0131krada arabulucuya ba\u015fvurulmadan dava a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde herhangi bir i\u015flem yap\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n davan\u0131n dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fu sebebiyle usulden reddine karar verilece\u011fi kurala ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Di\u011fer yandan i\u015f ili\u015fkisinden kaynaklanan uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131n daha k\u0131sa s\u00fcrede, daha az masrafla, i\u015f\u00e7i ve i\u015fverenin e\u015fit bir d\u00fczeyde tatmini sa\u011flanarak yarg\u0131ya ta\u015f\u0131nmadan \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi i\u00e7in arabuluculu\u011fun dava \u015fart\u0131 olarak d\u00fczenlenmesinin me\u015fru bir amac\u0131 oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Bu itibarla ba\u015fvurucunun mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131na y\u00f6nelik m\u00fcdahalenin \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fc olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ba\u015fvurucuya a\u011f\u0131r bir y\u00fck getirip getirmedi\u011fi hususlar\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n
13. Ba\u015fvurucu, i\u015fe iade talebini de i\u00e7erecek \u015fekilde arabuluculuk ba\u015fvurusunda bulunmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin i\u015fe iade talebiyle arabuluculuk ba\u015fvurusunda bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle esas\u0131n\u0131 incelemeksizin davay\u0131 reddetmesinden yak\u0131nmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
14. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi, Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n yerle\u015fik uygulamalar\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde Y\u00f6netmelik’in yay\u0131mland\u0131\u011f\u0131 2\/6\/2018 tarihinden sonra yap\u0131lan arabuluculuk ba\u015fvurular\u0131nda ba\u015fvuru formunun esas al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini belirtmi\u015f; formda i\u015fe iade talebi bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan dava \u015fart\u0131 olan arabulucuya ba\u015fvurma \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n yerine getirilmedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle davay\u0131 usulden reddetmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
15. Yarg\u0131tay s\u00fcregelen i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131nda ba\u015fvuru formu uygulamas\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 2\/6\/2018 tarihine kadar arabuluculuk anla\u015famama tutana\u011f\u0131nda arabuluculu\u011fa konu alacaklar tek tek belirtilmeden “i\u015f\u00e7ilik alacaklar\u0131” veya “i\u015f\u00e7i-i\u015fveren uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131” gibi soyut ifadeler kullan\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa da taraflar aras\u0131ndaki i\u015f\u00e7ilik alacaklar\u0131n\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131n arabuluculu\u011fa konu edildi\u011fini benimsemi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvuru formu uygulamas\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 2\/6\/2018 tarihinden sonraki ba\u015fvurularda ise hangi alacak veya tazminat kalemleri konusunda anla\u015fma sa\u011fland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ya da sa\u011flanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtmeyen son tutana\u011fa g\u00f6re dava \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fi kabul edilmemektedir (Yarg\u0131tay 9. Hukuk Dairesinin 22\/5\/2024 tarihli ve E.2024\/4291, K.2024\/8934; 14\/5\/2024 tarihli ve E.2024\/4484, K.2024\/8260 say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131).<\/p>\n
16. \u0130\u015f akdinin feshedilmesi \u00fczerine ba\u015fvurucu 27\/6\/2018 tarihinde arabuluculuk ba\u015fvuru formunu \u0130stanbul Arabuluculuk B\u00fcrosuna sunmu\u015ftur. An\u0131lan formda dava t\u00fcr\u00fc ve i\u015f\u00e7i alacaklar\u0131 [i\u015f\u00e7i ile i\u015fveren ili\u015fkisinden kaynaklanan (nispi) \u00fccret, fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma \u00fccreti, y\u0131ll\u0131k \u00fccretli izin alaca\u011f\u0131, k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131, ihbar tazminat\u0131, ayr\u0131mc\u0131l\u0131k tazminat\u0131, k\u00f6t\u00fc niyet tazminat\u0131, haks\u0131z fesih tazminat\u0131, manevi tazminat, i\u015f arama izni \u00fccreti] olarak belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
17. Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k i\u00e7in arabulucu se\u00e7ildikten sonra arabuluculuk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeleri y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeler sonucunda ba\u015fvurucu ile arabulucu aras\u0131nda imzalanan 18\/7\/2018 tarihli Hukuk Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131nda Dava \u015eart\u0131 Arabuluculuk Son Tutana\u011f\u0131’nda arabuluculuk konusu uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n i\u015fe iade talebinde anla\u015f\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma \u00fccreti, k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131, eksik \u00f6denen maa\u015f, ihbar tazminat\u0131 ve izin \u00fccreti oldu\u011fu, 27\/6\/2018 tarihinde arabuluculuk s\u00fcrecinin ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu s\u00fcrecin 18\/7\/2018 tarihinde bitti\u011fi, arabuluculu\u011fun anla\u015famama ile sonu\u00e7land\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Son tutanakta; daval\u0131 i\u015fverenin ikinci toplant\u0131ya kat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, arabuluculu\u011fun temel ilkeleri, arabuluculuk s\u00fcreci ve bu s\u00fcre\u00e7 sonunda haz\u0131rlanan arabuluculuk son tutana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n hukuki ve mali y\u00f6nlerden b\u00fct\u00fcn sonu\u00e7lar\u0131 hakk\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucuya bilgi verildi\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
18. 7\/6\/2012 tarihli ve 6325 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131nda Arabuluculuk Kanunu’nun 17. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131nda arabuluculuk faaliyeti sonunda taraflar\u0131n anla\u015famad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n tutanak ile belgelendirilece\u011fi ve bu belgenin arabulucu taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenerek arabulucu ve taraflarca imzalanaca\u011f\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede d\u00fczenlenen 18\/7\/2018 tarihli son tutanakta i\u015fe iade taraflar aras\u0131nda m\u00fczakere edilen bir husus olarak belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun gerek i\u015fe iade hususunun m\u00fczakere konusu yap\u0131lmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik iradesinin bulunmas\u0131 gerekse de i\u015fverenin bu hususa y\u00f6nelik itiraz\u0131n\u0131n olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda i\u015fe iadenin m\u00fczakere edilmedi\u011finden s\u00f6z etmek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n
19. \u00d6te yandan Y\u00f6netmelik’in 20. maddesinin (3) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131nda arabuluculuk faaliyeti sonunda d\u00fczenlenen son tutana\u011fa, faaliyetin sonu\u00e7lanmas\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda hangi hususlar\u0131n yaz\u0131laca\u011f\u0131na taraflar\u0131n karar verece\u011fi, arabulucunun bu tutanak ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131 konusunda taraflara gerekli a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 yapaca\u011f\u0131 kural\u0131na yer verilmi\u015ftir. Bu kurala g\u00f6re son tutana\u011f\u0131n taraflar\u0131n beyan\u0131na g\u00f6re olu\u015fturulmas\u0131 esast\u0131r. Arabuluculu\u011fun sonu\u00e7land\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve ne \u015fekilde tamamland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6steren son tutanakta taraflar\u0131n i\u015fe iade konusunda anla\u015famad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n imza alt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131 dava \u015fart\u0131 olan arabuluculu\u011fa ba\u015fvurman\u0131n yerine getirilmedi\u011finin ispat\u0131 niteli\u011findedir.<\/p>\n
20. 7036 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 3. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda kanuna, bireysel veya toplu i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesine dayanan i\u015f\u00e7i veya i\u015fveren alaca\u011f\u0131 ve tazminat\u0131na ili\u015fkin olarak a\u00e7\u0131lacak davalarda arabulucuya ba\u015fvurulmu\u015f olmas\u0131 dava \u015fart\u0131 olarak \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Arabuluculu\u011fa ba\u015fvurma zorunlulu\u011funun ki\u015filerin hak aramalar\u0131n\u0131 imk\u00e2ns\u0131z h\u00e2le getiren veya a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 derecede zorla\u015ft\u0131ran etkisiz ve sonu\u00e7suz bir s\u00fcrece neden olmad\u0131k\u00e7a hak arama h\u00fcrriyetini s\u0131n\u0131rlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemez. Dava \u015fart\u0131 olman\u0131n bir sonucu olarak arabuluculu\u011fa ba\u015fvurma bir zorunluluk arz etmekte ise de bu zorunluluk yaln\u0131zca arabuluculu\u011fa ba\u015fvuru ile s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olup arabuluculuk s\u00fcrecinin i\u015fleyi\u015fi ve sonucu \u00fczerinde taraf iradelerinin egemen oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Taraflar istedikleri zaman s\u00fcreci sonland\u0131rabilecekleri gibi s\u00fcre\u00e7 sonunda anla\u015fmaya var\u0131p varmamak konusunda da tercih hakk\u0131na sahiptir. Anla\u015fmaya var\u0131lamamas\u0131 h\u00e2linde ise uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fc i\u00e7in yarg\u0131 yoluna ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Bu bak\u0131mdan Kanun’un arabuluculuk s\u00fcreci ve sonucu y\u00f6n\u00fcnden taraf iradelerini esas ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir (AYM, E.2017\/178, K.2018\/82, 11\/7\/2018, \u00a7 24).<\/p>\n
21. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin arabuluculuk ba\u015fvuru formunda i\u015fe iadenin m\u00fczakere konular\u0131 aras\u0131nda bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik kabul\u00fc ise arabuluculuk kurumunun getirili\u015f amac\u0131yla ba\u011fda\u015fmamaktad\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun iradesine uygun olarak d\u00fczenlenen son tutanakta i\u015fe iadeye m\u00fczakere edilen hususlar aras\u0131nda yer verilmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda arabuluculuk ba\u015fvuru formu esas al\u0131narak dava \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclemez. \u00d6nemli olan i\u015fe iadenin taraflarca arabuluculuk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmelerine konu edilip edilmedi\u011fidir. Ba\u015fvuru formunda i\u015fe iade m\u00fczakere edilecek konular aras\u0131nda belirtilmese bile taraflar\u0131n iradeleri ve son tutanak birlikte g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde dava \u015fart\u0131 olan arabuluculu\u011fa i\u015fe iade davas\u0131 \u00f6ncesinde ba\u015fvuruldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
22. Ba\u015fvurucu; bireysel ba\u015fvuru formunda, arabuluculuk ba\u015fvurusunda bulunurken formda hangi haklar\u0131 i\u015faretleyece\u011fini bilmedi\u011fini, arabuluculuk b\u00fcrosundaki memurlar\u0131n y\u00f6nlendirmesi ile formu doldurdu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla formun matbu olarak doldurulan form olarak haz\u0131rland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, anla\u015fmaya var\u0131lamayan hususlar\u0131n neler oldu\u011funun tespiti noktas\u0131nda her iki taraf\u0131n iradesiyle arabuluculuk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmelerini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftiren t\u00fcm ilgililerin iradelerini yans\u0131tan arabuluculuk son tutana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6nem te\u015fkil etti\u011fini, nitekim son tutanakta da i\u015fe iade talebinin kabul g\u00f6rmedi\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir. Yarg\u0131tay da 2\/6\/2018 tarihinden sonra yap\u0131lan arabuluculuk ba\u015fvurular\u0131nda son tutana\u011f\u0131 esas alarak dava \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fip ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fini de\u011ferlendirmektedir.<\/p>\n
23. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131nda da at\u0131f yap\u0131lan Yarg\u0131tay yerle\u015fik uygulamalar\u0131nda 2\/6\/2018 tarihinden sonra yap\u0131lacak arabuluculuk ba\u015fvurular\u0131nda formda eksiklik olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde \u00f6zellikle ba\u015fvuru yerle\u015fim yerindeki veya i\u015fin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 yerdeki adliye arabuluculuk b\u00fcrosuna yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise g\u00f6revli memurun s\u00f6z konusu eksikli\u011fin giderilmesi hususunda ilgiliyi uyarmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi kabul edilmektedir. Ancak B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi, \u0130stanbul Arabuluculuk B\u00fcrosu taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen ve ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan imzalanan formda “i\u015f\u00e7i i\u015fveren ili\u015fkisinden kaynaklanan (nispi)” \u015feklindeki soyut ifadenin eksiklik olarak de\u011ferlendirilebilecek hangi konular\u0131 veya i\u015f\u00e7ilik alacaklar\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7erdi\u011finin a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fine ili\u015fkin olarak ba\u015fvurucunun uyar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair herhangi bir tespitte bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu durumda arabuluculuk b\u00fcrosunun tanzim etti\u011fi formda genel bir ifadeye yer verilmesi ve an\u0131lan ifadenin somutla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik sorumlulu\u011fun yerine getirilmesinin tamamen ba\u015fvurucudan beklenmesi ba\u015fvurucuya a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 y\u00fck y\u00fcklemektedir.<\/p>\n
24. Yukar\u0131daki a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde 7036 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 3. maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen dava \u015fart\u0131 olarak arabuluculu\u011fa ba\u015fvuru zorunlulu\u011funun ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fine ili\u015fkin B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6z konusu kanun h\u00fckm\u00fcne ola\u011fan\u0131n d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir anlam vermek suretiyle ba\u015fvurucunun dava a\u00e7mas\u0131n\u0131 imk\u00e2ns\u0131z h\u00e2le getirdi\u011fi ve arabuluculuk \u015fart\u0131na ili\u015fkin kurallar bak\u0131m\u0131ndan a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 \u015fekilci bir yakla\u015f\u0131m sergiledi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
25. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin i\u015fe iade talebi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden dava \u015fart\u0131 olan arabuluculu\u011fa ba\u015fvurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin yorumunun mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131na y\u00f6nelik kat\u0131 bir yorum oldu\u011fu, bu yorumun ba\u015fvurucu \u00fczerinde a\u011f\u0131r bir k\u00fclfete sebep oldu\u011fu ve bu suretle ba\u015fvurucunun katlanmak zorunda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 k\u00fclfetin hedeflenen me\u015fru ama\u00e7larla kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcz oldu\u011fu sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
26. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/p>\n
27. Ba\u015fvurucu, ihlalin tespiti talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
28. Ba\u015fvuruda tespit edilen hak ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bu kapsamda karar\u0131n g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi yarg\u0131 mercilerince yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken i\u015f, yeniden yarg\u0131lama i\u015flemlerini ba\u015flatmak ve Anayasa Mahkemesini ihlal sonucuna ula\u015ft\u0131ran nedenleri gideren, ihlal karar\u0131nda belirtilen ilkelere uygun yeni bir karar vermektir (Mehmet Do\u011fan [GK], B. No: 2014\/8875, 7\/6\/2018, \u00a7\u00a7 54-60; Alig\u00fcl Alkaya ve di\u011ferleri (2), B. No: 2016\/12506, 7\/11\/2019, \u00a7\u00a7 53-60, 66; Kadri Enis Berbero\u011flu (3) [GK], B. No: 2020\/32949, 21\/1\/2021, \u00a7\u00a7 93-100).<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 27. Hukuk Dairesine (E.2020\/354, K.2020\/426) iletilmek \u00fczere \u0130stanbul 5. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesine (E.2018\/251, K.2019\/416) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. 446,90 TL har\u00e7 ve 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 30.446,90 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. \u00d6demenin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucunun Hazine ve Maliye Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren d\u00f6rt ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u00f6demede gecikme olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu s\u00fcrenin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6deme tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in yasal FA\u0130Z UYGULANMASINA,<\/p>\n
F. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 24\/10\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 24\/10\/2024 tarihli ve 2020\/19910 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 karar\u0131\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130 ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 FERHAT K\u00dc\u00c7\u00dcK BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/19910) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 24\/10\/2024 R.G. Tarih ve Say\u0131: 7\/3\/2025 – 32834 \u00a0 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR Raport\u00f6r : \u015eahap KAYMAK Ba\u015fvurucu : Ferhat K\u00dc\u00c7\u00dcK Vekili : Av. Burak SUCAKLI \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, i\u015fe iade talebiyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n dava \u00f6ncesinde arabulucuya ba\u015fvurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan reddedilmesi nedeniyle mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ba\u015fvurucu, \u00f6zel bir firmada \u015fof\u00f6r olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmaktayken i\u015f akdinin feshedilmesi \u00fczerine \u0130stanbul 5. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesinde (Mahkeme) i\u015f akdinin ge\u00e7erli bir neden olmaks\u0131z\u0131n feshi iddias\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak feshin ge\u00e7ersizli\u011finin tespiti ile i\u015fe iade davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 3. Mahkeme; davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne, daval\u0131 i\u015fverence yap\u0131lan feshin ge\u00e7ersizli\u011fine ve ba\u015fvurucunun i\u015fe iadesine karar vermi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucunun yasal s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde ba\u015fvurmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen daval\u0131 i\u015fverence s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde i\u015fe ba\u015flat\u0131lmamas\u0131 h\u00e2linde \u00f6denmesi gereken tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurucunun d\u00f6rt ayl\u0131k \u00fccreti olan br\u00fct 11.530,68 TL olarak tespitine, karar\u0131n kesinle\u015fmesine kadar en \u00e7ok d\u00f6rt ayl\u0131k \u00fccret ve di\u011fer haklar\u0131 i\u00e7in net 10.295,13 TL’nin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00f6denmesi gerekti\u011finin tespitine, fesih s\u0131ras\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucuya k\u0131dem ve ihbar tazminat\u0131 \u00f6denmi\u015f ise …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-34994","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n