Previous Page  307 / 469 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 307 / 469 Next Page
Page Background

LAW OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

293

Another notion to be differed from joinder of actions is “competition

of claims”. The competition of claims has the meaning to have several

legal grounds to allege one claim. So that, the competition of claims is

based on only one claim, which can be alleged on more than one legal

ground while the joinder of actions is based on occurrence of several cause

of actions that lead to make more than one claim within one sole action.

In fact, for the competition of claims, the competition is not between the

claims but between the legal grounds

2

.

(ii) Non-existence of a relation between the claims as to be principal

or accessory

The second condition for joinder of actions is non-existence of a

relation between the claims as to be principal or accessory. This condition

emphasizes the difference between joinder of actions and actions with

alternative pleadings since the latter requires existence of a claim

alternative to principal claim for the cases where the principal claim is not

accepted. Accordingly, for existence of joinder of actions it is necessary

that there is no order of priority between the claims, an order as being the

principal and accessory claim.

(iii) The claims need to be considered within the same type of

jurisdiction

For joinder of actions, the claims need to be considered within the

same type of jurisdiction. However, there is no explanation neither in the

article nor the justification regarding what to be understood with “type

of jurisdiction”. The term “type of jurisdiction” is defined in the doctrine

as “holding the transactions forming an entity subject to a different

judgment procedure”

3

. Departing from this definition, the different types

of jurisdiction are classified as Constitutional Jurisdiction, Administrative

Jurisdiction and Civil and Penal Jurisdiction

4

. As seen, the types of

jurisdiction are accepted as judicial remedies. In this case, it should

2

ALANGOYA, H. Yavuz/ YILDIRIM, M. Kamil/DEREN – YILDIRIM, Nevhis

, Medeni

Usul Hukuku Esasları, İstanbul 2011, s. 129.

3 

KURU, Baki / ARSLAN, Ramazan/ YILMAZ, Ejder

, Medeni Usul Hukuku, Ders Kitabı,

Ankara, 2011, s. 58.

4 

KURU/ARSLAN/YILMAZ

, s, 58 vd.

PEKCANITEZ, Hakan / ATALAY, Oğuz /

ÖZEKES, Muhammed

, Medeni usul Hukuku, İstanbul 2011, s.73 vd.