e-book2011

NEWSLETTER 2011

292

occurrence of contradictory court decisions. In case of joinder of actions,

there are actions and decisions amounting to the number of claims.

However, the procedural transactions are conducted at the same time and

so that it prevents loss of time.

The Conditions for Implementation

As seen above, the joindery of actions had not been explicitly

regulated under Turkish Law. As a result of this fact the conditions for

implementation had been determined by the doctrine

. However, the

conditions for implementation have now been explicitly determined

within art. 110 of CPC. Pursuant to this article, the joinder of actions shall

be possible when all the alleged claims are considered within the authority

of same type of jurisdiction and in the same venue. The justification of

the article stipulates the conditions more detailed: (i) existence of several

- more than one claim- claims to be alleged by the claimant against the

same defendant, (ii) non-existence of a relation between the claims as to

be principal or accessory, (iii) the claims need to be considered within the

authority of same type of jurisdiction, (iv) the venue to settle all of the

claims must be the same.

(i) Existence of several claims to be alleged by the claimant against

the same defendant

The first condition sought for joinder of the actions is existence of

several claims to be alleged by the claimant against the same defendant.

However, the cases inwhich there are several claims alleged by the claimant

may differ from each other. For instance, the actions with alternative

pleadings, subsidiary claims and counter claims are the actions in which

several claims are alleged but these actions shall not be considered as

joinder of the actions. The joinder of actions requires the existence of

the independent claims in addition to each other. Accordingly, it is not

possible to accept occurrence of joinder of actions in all cases where

there are more than one accrued causes of action. The claims are not

alleged in an order and there is no gradation between these claims; all of

the claims have the same importance level.

KURU, Baki

, Hukuk Muhakemeleri Usulü,

, 6. Baskı, İstanbul 2001, s. 1498.