THE SITUATION THAT SHOULD BE PAID ATTENTION TO ABOUT GARNISHMENTS WHICH MAY CAUSE UNDERPAID WAGE FOR THE EMPLOYEE AND RIGHTFUL TERMINATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE FINES
In accordance with the President’s Decision published in the Official Gazette on April 30, 2020; it is decided that to pausing period which was decided as starting from 22.03.2020 until 30.04.2020 has been extended until 15.06.2020 for all enforcement and bankruptcy proceedings and not performing any party and enforcement transactions, not performing any new requests for enforcement and bankruptcy, and not actualizing and executing provisional attachment decisions in this direction.
Within this scope, we emphasize that all deductions due to garnishments as of 22.03.2020 should be paused until 15.06.2020 by considering the precedent below.
Some of administrative institutions and our colleagues also have some contrary opinions. E.g.: The Opinion of Department of Enforcement Affairs, Ministry of Justice
“…Unlike the garnishments, deductions from the salary are in the nature of a conduct transaction. In case a precautionary decision is made for the cessation of the proceedings, the sequestration remains on the salary but the deduction cannot be continued. Deductions for garnishment should be paused. Therefore, while it was necessary for the court to decide to pause the salary deductions that are in the nature of the conduct transaction with the continuation of the sequestration on the salary, making such written decision is not correct…” The decision file numbered 2015/21790 decision numbered 2015/30722 dated 7.12.2015 of 12nd CİVİL CHAMBER OF SUPREME COURT
As a matter of fact, in the doctrine, according to the opinion of Prof. Dr. Muhammet Özekes;
a. Both in the Presidential Decision enforcing the Article 330 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law and in the Law Numbered 7226, it is clearly stated that the proceedings will pause and that the party and enforcement transactions cannot be performed.
b. Pause of proceedings does not mean to pause half of the proceedings, to continue the other half, but pausing it as a whole.
c. The Article 330 of Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law and Law numbered 7226 state that “proceedings pause” without any distinction (besides the exceptions specified).
d. The pause of proceedings is not regulated by this regulation for the first time, there are provisions regarding the pause of proceedings in almost 20 places in the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law.
e. Garnishments and lien notifications are like precautionary measures which are the continuation of the original sequestration decision and its transactions. There is no hesitation in this matter in the Doctrine and Supreme Court decisions. The opinion of the Department of Enforcement Affairs of Ministry of Justice is also contrary to the clear Supreme Court decisions on this subject. In fact, the Supreme Court has decisions which are like response to the opinion of this Department.
FOR MORE DETAILS , CONSULT THE ARTICLE’s WRITER
Yalçın & Toygar Law Office
Kabatas-Setustu, Inebolu Sok. No:25 Ada Apt. D.11 34427 Istanbul
+90 212 293 09 09
Email : firstname.lastname@example.org