7036 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u015f Mahkemeleri Kanunu’nun 1 Ocak 2018’de y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girmesiyle birlikte, i\u015f\u00e7i veya i\u015fveren alaca\u011f\u0131 ve tazminat\u0131 ile i\u015fe iade talebiyle a\u00e7\u0131lacak davalarda \u00f6nce arabulucuya ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131 zorunlu h\u00e2le gelmi\u015ftir. Arabulucuya ba\u015fvurulmadan a\u00e7\u0131lan dava, dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan usulden reddedilmektedir. Bu nedenle i\u015fe iade talebinin arabuluculuk a\u015famas\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekten ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcl\u00fcp s\u00fcr\u00fclmedi\u011fi, davan\u0131n esas\u0131na ge\u00e7ilmeden \u00f6nce cevaplanmas\u0131 gereken bir sorudur. Uygulamada bunun i\u00e7in ba\u015fvuru formuna ve arabuluculuk son tutana\u011f\u0131na bak\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Anayasa Mahkemesi, 3 Mart 2026 tarihli ve 2022\/82055 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 karar\u0131nda<\/a> bu iki belgenin birbirini tutmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir i\u015fe iade dosyas\u0131n\u0131 incelemi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvuru formunda i\u015fe iade se\u00e7ene\u011fi i\u015faretlenmemi\u015f, buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k son tutanakta i\u015fe iade g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmelere konu edilen hususlar aras\u0131nda yer alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130\u015fe iadeye ba\u011fl\u0131 mali haklar, yani bo\u015fta ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre \u00fccreti ve i\u015fe ba\u015flatmama tazminat\u0131 ise hem formda hem de tutanakta talep edilmi\u015ftir. B\u00f6lge adliye mahkemesi formdaki i\u015faretlemeyi esas alarak davay\u0131 usulden reddetmi\u015f, Anayasa Mahkemesi ise Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine oy birli\u011fiyle karar vermi\u015ftir. Karar, 21 Eyl\u00fcl 2026 tarihli ve 33377 say\u0131l\u0131 Resm\u00ee Gazete’de<\/a> yay\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n Mahkeme, karar\u0131nda arabuluculu\u011fun dava \u015fart\u0131 olarak aranmas\u0131n\u0131n kanuni bir dayana\u011f\u0131 ve me\u015fru bir amac\u0131 bulundu\u011funu kabul etmekle birlikte, ihlalin bu \u015fart\u0131n somut dosyada a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 \u015fekilci bi\u00e7imde uygulanmas\u0131ndan do\u011fdu\u011funu tespit etmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme bu sonuca son tutanaktaki beyanlar\u0131 ve i\u015fe iadeye ba\u011fl\u0131 mali haklar\u0131n talep edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirerek ula\u015fm\u0131\u015f, b\u00f6ylece arabuluculuk kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n dava \u015fart\u0131 incelemesinde nas\u0131l okunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fine ili\u015fkin bir \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct de ortaya koymu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n Arabuluculuk ba\u015fvurusu dilek\u00e7eyle, arabuluculuk b\u00fcrosunda form doldurularak veya elektronik ortamda yap\u0131labilmektedir. B\u00fcroda doldurulan formda i\u015f\u00e7inin talepleri \u00fccret alaca\u011f\u0131, fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma, k\u0131dem tazminat\u0131 ve i\u015fe iade gibi haz\u0131r se\u00e7enekler aras\u0131ndan i\u015faretlenmektedir.<\/p>\n Arabulucunun g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmelerin sonunda d\u00fczenledi\u011fi son tutanak ise s\u00fcrecin sonucunu belgelemektedir. 6325 say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131nda Arabuluculuk Kanunu uyar\u0131nca tutana\u011fa sonu\u00e7 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda hangi hususlar\u0131n yaz\u0131laca\u011f\u0131na taraflar karar vermektedir.<\/p>\n Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n yerle\u015fik i\u00e7tihad\u0131na g\u00f6re, ba\u015fvuru formu uygulamas\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 2 Haziran 2018’den \u00f6nce yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurularda son tutanakta \u201ci\u015f\u00e7ilik alacaklar\u0131\u201d gibi genel bir ifade kullan\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa i\u015f\u00e7ilik alacaklar\u0131n\u0131n tamam\u0131n\u0131n arabuluculu\u011fa g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc kabul edilmektedir. Bu tarihten sonraki ba\u015fvurularda ise hangi alacak veya tazminat kalemlerinde anla\u015fma sa\u011flan\u0131p sa\u011flanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a g\u00f6stermeyen bir son tutanak, dava \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fini ispatlamaya yeterli g\u00f6r\u00fclmemektedir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla 2 Haziran 2018’den sonraki ba\u015fvurularda hangi talebin arabuluculu\u011fa g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, formdaki i\u015faretlemeye ve son tutanaktaki yaz\u0131ma bak\u0131larak belirlenmektedir.<\/p>\n Alt i\u015fveren konumundaki bir g\u00fcvenlik \u015firketinde \u00f6zel g\u00fcvenlik g\u00f6revlisi olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan ba\u015fvurucunun i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesini i\u015fveren \u015firket feshetmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, 18 \u015eubat 2020’de bu \u015firket ile as\u0131l i\u015fverene kar\u015f\u0131 \u0130zmir Arabuluculuk B\u00fcrosuna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. Formdaki i\u015fe iade se\u00e7ene\u011fi bo\u015f b\u0131rak\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, ancak alacak kalemleri aras\u0131nda \u00fccret, fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma, k\u0131dem ve ihbar tazminat\u0131 gibi kalemlerin yan\u0131nda bo\u015fta ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre \u00fccreti ve i\u015fe ba\u015flatmama tazminat\u0131 da g\u00f6sterilmi\u015ftir. Formda belirtilen kalemler aras\u0131nda gemi adamlar\u0131n\u0131n ia\u015fe bedeline ili\u015fkin \u201cg. adam\u0131 ia\u015fe b.\u201d kalemi de yer alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u0130\u015fverenler 24 \u015eubat 2020’deki ilk oturuma kat\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f, ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn d\u00fczenlenen son tutanakta kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n kat\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle anla\u015fma sa\u011flanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu vekilinin tutana\u011fa ge\u00e7en beyan\u0131nda formdaki kalemler ayn\u0131 s\u0131rayla yeniden say\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, ancak \u201cg. adam\u0131 ia\u015fe b.\u201d kaleminin yerinde \u201cg. adam\u0131 i\u015fe iade b.\u201d ibaresi yer alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n \u0130zmir 11. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesi feshin ge\u00e7ersizli\u011fine, ba\u015fvurucunun i\u015fe iadesine, i\u015fe ba\u015flatmama tazminat\u0131n\u0131n d\u00f6rt ayl\u0131k \u00fccret tutar\u0131nda belirlenmesine ve bo\u015fta ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in en \u00e7ok d\u00f6rt ayl\u0131k \u00fccret ile di\u011fer haklar\u0131n \u00f6denmesine karar vermi\u015ftir. \u0130\u015fverenlerin istinaf ba\u015fvurusu \u00fczerine \u0130zmir B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 15. Hukuk Dairesi bu karar\u0131 kald\u0131rm\u0131\u015f ve davay\u0131 dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan kesin olarak usulden reddetmi\u015ftir. Daire, formda i\u015fe iade se\u00e7ene\u011fi i\u015faretlenmedi\u011finden bu talebin arabuluculu\u011fa g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fclmedi\u011fini kabul etmi\u015f, tutanaktaki ibareyi de i\u015fe iade talebi olarak de\u011fil, formdaki \u201cg. adam\u0131 ia\u015fe b.\u201d kalemi olarak yorumlam\u0131\u015f ve ba\u015fvurucunun gemi adam\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na de\u011finmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n Anayasa Mahkemesi, davan\u0131n dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan reddedilerek esas\u0131n\u0131n incelenmemesini mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131na m\u00fcdahale olarak nitelendirmi\u015ftir. M\u00fcdahalenin kanuni dayana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011funu ve me\u015fru bir ama\u00e7 ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kabul eden Mahkeme, incelemesini m\u00fcdahalenin \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fc olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ba\u015fvurucuya a\u011f\u0131r bir k\u00fclfet y\u00fckleyip y\u00fcklemedi\u011fi \u00fczerinde yo\u011funla\u015ft\u0131rm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n Mahkeme bu incelemede \u00f6ncelikle arabuluculuk s\u00fcrecinin niteli\u011fine dikkat \u00e7ekmi\u015ftir. Kararda, arabuluculuk zorunlulu\u011funun yaln\u0131zca arabulucuya ba\u015fvuruyla s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 oldu\u011fu, s\u00fcrecin i\u015fleyi\u015fi ve sonucu \u00fczerinde ise taraflar\u0131n iradesinin belirleyici oldu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme, son tutana\u011f\u0131n da taraflar\u0131n beyan\u0131na g\u00f6re olu\u015fturuldu\u011funu vurgulam\u0131\u015f, tutanakta i\u015fe iade konusunda anla\u015f\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n imza alt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n dava \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n yerine getirildi\u011finin ispat\u0131 niteli\u011finde oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n Somut olay bak\u0131m\u0131ndan Mahkeme, Dairenin ibareye ili\u015fkin yorumunu ayr\u0131ca ele almam\u0131\u015f, son tutanaktaki beyan\u0131 ba\u015fvurucunun i\u015fe iadeyi m\u00fczakere konusu yapma iradesinin ifadesi olarak de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun i\u015fe iadeye ba\u011fl\u0131 mali haklar\u0131 da talep etti\u011fini dikkate alan Mahkeme, bu iki olgu kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda i\u015fe iadenin arabuluculuk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmelerine d\u00e2hil edilmedi\u011finden s\u00f6z edilemeyece\u011fi sonucuna varm\u0131\u015f ve b\u00f6lge adliye mahkemesinin yorumunu mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan kat\u0131 bir yorum olarak nitelendirmi\u015ftir. Mahkemeye g\u00f6re bu yorum, ba\u015fvurucuya hedeflenen me\u015fru ama\u00e7la orant\u0131l\u0131 olmayan a\u011f\u0131r bir k\u00fclfet y\u00fcklemi\u015f ve mahkemeye eri\u015fim hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlaline yol a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n Giderim bak\u0131m\u0131ndan Mahkeme, ihlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131na h\u00fckmetmi\u015f ve karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin \u0130zmir B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 15. Hukuk Dairesine iletilmek \u00fczere \u0130zmir 11. \u0130\u015f Mahkemesine g\u00f6nderilmesine karar vermi\u015ftir. Yeniden yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yeterli giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat talebini reddetmi\u015f, ihlal karar\u0131n\u0131n davan\u0131n kabul\u00fc veya reddi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir sonu\u00e7 i\u00e7ermedi\u011fini de vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n Karar\u0131n ortaya koydu\u011fu \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct, dava \u015fart\u0131 incelemesinde ba\u015fvuru formunun, son tutanaktaki beyanlar\u0131n ve i\u015fe iadeye ba\u011fl\u0131 mali haklar\u0131n talep edilip edilmedi\u011finin birlikte de\u011ferlendirilmesidir. Buna g\u00f6re formdaki bir eksiklik tek ba\u015f\u0131na usulden ret gerek\u00e7esi yap\u0131lamamaktad\u0131r. Bununla birlikte karar, i\u015fe iade talebinin ne formda ne de son tutanakta yer almad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir dosyada da dava \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015f say\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 anlam\u0131na gelmemektedir.<\/p>\n \u0130\u015fe iade talebiyle arabulucuya fesih bildiriminin tebli\u011finden itibaren bir ay i\u00e7inde ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011finden, istinaf a\u015famas\u0131nda verilen bir usulden ret karar\u0131 \u00e7o\u011fu zaman i\u015f\u00e7inin hak kayb\u0131na u\u011framas\u0131na yol a\u00e7maktad\u0131r. Bu nedenle i\u015f\u00e7i veya vekili ba\u015fvuru formunda i\u015fe iade se\u00e7ene\u011fini i\u015faretlemeli, son tutanakta da i\u015fe iade talebinin k\u0131saltma kullan\u0131lmadan, bu mali haklarla birlikte yaz\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamal\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130\u015fverenin kat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmede tutanak yaln\u0131zca i\u015f\u00e7inin beyan\u0131na g\u00f6re d\u00fczenlendi\u011finden, tutana\u011f\u0131n uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 do\u011fru yans\u0131t\u0131p yans\u0131tmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 denetlemek isteyen i\u015fveren g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeye bizzat veya yetkili temsilcisi arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla kat\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. Dava \u015fart\u0131 itiraz\u0131nda bulunacak i\u015fveren de itiraz\u0131n\u0131 tek bir form alan\u0131na de\u011fil, arabuluculuk kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcne dayand\u0131rmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I. Giri\u015f 7036 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130\u015f Mahkemeleri Kanunu’nun 1 Ocak 2018’de y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girmesiyle birlikte, i\u015f\u00e7i veya i\u015fveren alaca\u011f\u0131 ve tazminat\u0131 ile i\u015fe iade talebiyle a\u00e7\u0131lacak davalarda \u00f6nce arabulucuya ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131 zorunlu h\u00e2le gelmi\u015ftir. Arabulucuya ba\u015fvurulmadan a\u00e7\u0131lan dava, dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan usulden reddedilmektedir. Bu nedenle i\u015fe iade talebinin arabuluculuk a\u015famas\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekten ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcl\u00fcp s\u00fcr\u00fclmedi\u011fi, davan\u0131n esas\u0131na ge\u00e7ilmeden \u00f6nce […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":11242,"template":"","insight_category":[],"insight_topic":[],"class_list":["post-11221","insight","type-insight","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.asylegal.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insight\/11221","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.asylegal.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insight"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.asylegal.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/insight"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.asylegal.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.asylegal.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insight\/11221\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11222,"href":"https:\/\/www.asylegal.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insight\/11221\/revisions\/11222"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.asylegal.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/11242"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.asylegal.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11221"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"insight_category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.asylegal.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insight_category?post=11221"},{"taxonomy":"insight_topic","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.asylegal.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insight_topic?post=11221"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}II. Arabuluculuk Ba\u015fvurusunun Yap\u0131lmas\u0131 Ve Son Tutana\u011f\u0131n D\u00fczenlenmesi<\/h2>\n
III. Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k<\/h2>\n
IV. Anayasa Mahkemesinin De\u011ferlendirmesi<\/h2>\n
V. Genel De\u011ferlendirme<\/h2>\n