In the decision of the Constitutional Court dated 2023/33, 2023/117 Decision dated 22/6/2023, it unanimously canceled the phrase " ...in the fifth year as of the date of accession..." in the article in question by unanimously declaring that the second fifth paragraph of Article 7, which was added together with Article 38 of the Turkish Commercial Code dated 26/06/2012 and numbered 6335, was contrary to Articles 2, 13, 35 and 36 of the Constitution.  

 

In the aforementioned decision, the reason for cancellation was contrary to Articles 35 and 40 of the Constitution. In the event that the purpose of Article 7 of the Turkish Commercial Code is facilitated liquidation or, in some cases, is deleted from the registry without liquidation, it has been interpreted that it exists for the purpose of facilitating re-registration, and for this very reason, the Constitutional Court has decided to cancel this part of the article due to the necessity of "...theway of conducting events has become dysfunctional due to this article...".  

It was published in the Official Gazette on 15 September 2023.

 

 

Article 153/A of the Tax Procedure Law titled  "collateral application" states that "Accrued collateral will be received  from these … persons shall be followed up and collected in accordance with Law No. 6183." has been subjected to a cancellation examination before the Constitutional Court. The collection of the guarantee accrued in the decision made by the Constitutional Court in accordance with the Law No. 6183 has been interpreted as a violation of the right to justice. The restrictions to be made on the right of citizenship can only be made by law to the extent referred to in the Constitution. However, the existence of an annex to the law limiting fundamental rights is not sufficient, these laws must be specific, accessible and enforceable in a way that does not allow arbitrariness. In the event that the amount of guarantee referred to in the rules added in this context is not stated, this guarantee is determined as the guarantee receivable and the follow-up and collection of the determined receivable is requested in accordance with the Law No. 6183, but it is decided that there are no necessary and sufficient guarantees for this guarantee to be calculated in accordance with the 13th and 35th articles of the Constitution.

It was published in the Official Gazette on 20 July 2023.

 

 

In the decision of the Constitutional Court dated 23/3/2023 with the application number 2019/40991, the allegation of violation of the right to housing immunity due to the fact that the on-site examination is unlawful, the allegation of violation of the right to privacy due to the administrative fine imposed due to the need to restrict competition, In determining the amount of the penalty, due to the fact that the export turnover of the other parties is not taken into account and only the export turnover of the applicant is taken into account, the allegation of violation of the discriminatory law in relation to the first right, the same act is not re-judged and punished due to the second time questioning The allegation of violation of the principle, the allegation of violation of the right to a reasonable trial due to the long duration of the trial, the allegation of violation of the right to access to the court due to the removal of the law that entered into force while the trial was continuing, and the allegation of violation of the right to access to the court and the application made to the Constitutional Court were examined. In the application examined, it was decided that the right to housing immunity was violated due to the on-site examination without a decision. It is understood that the violation stems from the fact that the authority to examine on-site, which is included in the relevant articles of the Law No. 4054, is not regulated in accordance with the provisions of the first paragraph of Article 21 of the Constitution. 

It was published in the Official Gazette on 20 June 2023.

 

 

 

In Article 5 of thePersonal Data Protection Law No. 6698, the processing conditions have been regulated. In this context, it has been explained that the data cannot be processed without the person's personal data. In the continuation of the Law, the concept of a clan is a clan. ThePersonal Data Protection Board has made a statement about these SMSs in the relevant context. The first of these is the scope of clarification and permits. It is necessary to provide information and agreement about the purpose and content of the SMSs sent to the customers during the purchase transactions carried out in the safe deposit box. In SMS messages, it is essential to have the information channels provided by the persons authorized by the data controller. The Second main heading is the right to request transactions and approval. It is recommended to stop adding different transactions with a single action, such as approving the third party by sending the verification code to the customers via SMS during the process of the statement. Separately, for the processes that should not be taken separately, they are offered to the customers and encouraged to be taken separately. Within the scope of Commercial Electronic Communications and Electronic Communications, in the event that the commercial electronic communication is taken as a lead, it is necessary to ensure that the suspicion to be taken does not cover all the elements determined by the Law. It should not be presented as a mandatory element for the commercial message to be taken as a guide and for the exchange to be completed. In addition, it is recommended to request for a commercial electronic message permission after the completion of the exchange. In this way, it will be prevented from being perceived as a part of the research. This decision emphasizes the principles to be followed in transactions related to the use of customer information, such as transparency, information and customer approval.

 

 

 

 

 

Within the scope of the investigation carried out by the Competition Authority, it was examined that the companies violated Article 4 of the Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition due to the determination of resale prices, the limitation of internet sales and the allegations of participation in the collection and distribution cartel.

 

Article 4 of the Law on the Protection of Competition is as follows: Agreements, concerted actions and all kinds of decisions and actions of the parties that have the purpose of directly or indirectly preventing, distorting or limiting competition in a certain goods or service market or that are capable of producing this effect are unlawful and prohibited.These situations are especially: a) Determining the purchase or sale price of goods or services , the cost that creates the price, profit, and all kinds of purchase or sale conditions, b) Determining the goods or service markets u sharing or controlling market resources or elements, c) controlling the amount of supply or demand of goods or services or determining them outside the market, d) enforcing, restricting the activities of competing companies or boycotting the companies that operate in the market or exempting them from the market with other actions, or Prevention of new entrants to the market, e) Application of different conditions to persons with equal status, equal rights, rights and acts, f) As contrary to the nature of the agreement or commercial team members, the obligation to purchase other goods or services together with a good or service or the connection of a good or service requested by the purchasers in the status of vehicle supplier to the purchase of another good or service by the purchaser of another good or service or the conditions for the re-supply of a supplied good or service to produce,                 

The Competition Authority has decided to impose administrative fines on the companies in question.