Collection Cannot Be Made Before The Finalisation Of The Case Regarding The Cancellation Of The Administrative Fine
19th Criminal Chamber 2019/1497 E. , 2020/8272 K.
“Case Law Text”
2918 dated 24/11/2016 and numbered ID-127988 of the Antalya Traffic Supervision Branch Directorate regarding the application for the administrative sanction decision minutes dated 24/11/2016 and numbered ID-127988 regarding the imposition of an administrative fine of 383,00 Turkish lira on the misdemeanant … due to the act of violating the Highways Traffic Law numbered 2918, on the grounds that the administrative transaction in question should be resolved by the administrative jurisdiction court, Antalya 1. Against the decision of the Criminal Judge of Peace dated 05/04/2018 and numbered 2017/6791 different business, the case file attached to the letter of the Ministry of Justice dated 23/01/2019 and numbered 14834, containing the request for reversal for the benefit of the law, was read with the notification of the Chief Public Prosecutor of the Court of Cassation dated 04/02/2019 and numbered KYB-2019-10573.
In the aforementioned notification;
Antalya 1. With the decision of the Criminal Judge of Peace No. 05/04/2018, it was decided to reject the application in terms of duty with the opinion that the application was not one of the works to be examined by the criminal judgeship of peace due to the fact that the misdemeanant stated in the petition of objection that he lost his driver’s licence and identity card, that an administrative fine was imposed on him unjustly and a tax debt was issued, and that the accrual phase was understood in the records kept by the Muratpaşa Tax Office Directorate in the content of the petition of objection, and that the dispute should be resolved by the court in administrative jurisdiction; Article 27 of the Law on Misdemeanours No. 5326 titled “Application Procedure”
“(1) An application can be made to the criminal court of peace against the administrative fine and the administrative sanction decision regarding the confiscation of the property, within fifteen days at the latest from the date of notification or announcement of the decision. If the application is not made within this period, the administrative sanction decision shall be finalised…
(3) The application shall be made with a petition to be submitted to the criminal court of peace by the legal representative or lawyer. The application petition shall be submitted in duplicate. (4) In the application petition, the information regarding the administrative sanction decision and the evidence put forward against this decision shall be clearly shown. (5) (Amended paragraph: 06/12/2006 – 5560 S.K.34.Art.) If the administrative sanction decision is issued by the court, only an appeal can be filed against this decision… (8) (Amended paragraph: 06/12/2006 – 5560 S.K.34.Art. (8) (Additional paragraph: 06/12/2006 – 5560 S.K.34)
In the event that decisions falling within the jurisdiction of the administrative jurisdiction have also been made in relation to the same person within the scope of the transaction in which the administrative sanction decision is issued; the allegations of unlawfulness regarding the administrative sanction decision shall be heard at the administrative jurisdiction together with the request for the cancellation of this transaction. “,
in the concrete case, without considering that the duty and authority to examine the misdemeanant’s application for the aforementioned traffic administrative fine decision report is under the jurisdiction of the criminal judgeship of peace, it is not seen to be in accordance with the 309th article of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271 on the grounds that it is not seen to be in accordance with the written decision, and it is requested to revoke the aforementioned decision for the benefit of the law in accordance with Article 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271;
Administrative fines are imposed in accordance with Article 17/4 of the Law No. 5326. According to Article 17/4 of the Law No. 5326, administrative fines shall be collected in accordance with the provisions of the Law No. 6183 on the Procedure for Collection of Public Receivables, and in accordance with the provisions of the Law No. 2576 on the Establishment and Duties of Regional Administrative Courts, Administrative Courts and Tax Courts, it is established that the jurisdiction in charge of hearing the cases related to the implementation of the Law No. 6183 on the Procedure for Collection of Public Receivables is the administrative jurisdiction;
In order to start the collection procedures of an administrative fine, it must be finalised, in case of filing a lawsuit for the cancellation of the administrative fine, a finalised public receivable cannot be mentioned, the collection procedures must be started after the finalisation of the lawsuit filed against the public receivable, as well as from the content and scope of the objection petition, it is understood that the objector has objected to the administrative fine itself by stating that the vehicle subject to the administrative fine does not belong to him, he does not know who it belongs to, and that an administrative fine has been imposed on him due to the use of his lost driver’s licence by someone else;
Since the content of the notification of the Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor of the Court of Cassation based on the request for reversal for the benefit of the law is deemed appropriate, the decision of the Antalya 1st Criminal Judge of Peace dated 05/04/2018 and numbered 2017/6791 amended business numbered 2017/6791 shall be REVERSED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE LAW in accordance with Article 309/4-a of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and it was unanimously decided on 24/06/2020 to carry out the subsequent proceedings in its place.
You can access our other article examples and petition examples by clicking here.