NEWSLETTER-2017

234 NEWSLETTER 2017 5326 lists administrative fines among the administrative sancti- ons. Article 20/4 titled “Investigation Statute of Limitations” of the same law determines the statute of limitations as 8 years for misdemeanors, punishable by proportional administrative fines. According to Article 60/2, entitled ‘statute of limitations,’ of Code of Obligations numbered 818, which was in force during the dates the lawsuit was active, and the fact that: “However, if the compensation is due to an act that requires a punishment with longer statute of limitations under penal laws, this statute of limitations shall prevail.” The legislator states that when the statute of limitations for criminal cases is longer than the statute of limitations in the Code of Obligations, the statute of limitations for criminal cases shall be applied to civil lawsuits. In the case at hand, when the application date to the Com- petition Authority (6.6.2008), following the awareness of the infringement giving rise to compensation and the motion date (29.10.2012) are analyzed together, the statute of limitations has not expired. The decision of approval of our Chamber shall be cancelled and the decision of the court shall be reversed, since the statute of limitations’ defense of the respondent had to be exami- ned pursuant to the provisions above and, as a result, the rejection on the grounds for the statute of limitations is incorrect 1 .” 1 In the same direction, the Court of Cassation 11th Civil Chamber, on 27.10.2015, 3450/11139: “ In the present case, when the date of application (22.11.2005 and 06.03.2006) to the Competition Authority by the claimant after having learned of the infringement giving rise to compensation, and the motion date (20.03.2012), which is a part of the merits of the case are analyzed together, it comes out that the statute of limitations is not expired. The dismissal of the action due to the statute of limitations by the court of first instance is not approved, and the deci- sion has to be reversed as the statute of limitations’ defence of the claimant must be evaluated according to the provisions, above” Also, the Court of Cassation 11th Civil Chamber, on 29.03.2016, 7405/3442, states that: “ (…) when the date of application to the Competition Authority by the claimant after having learned of the infringement giving rise to compensation, and the motion date, are analyzed together, it comes out that the statute of limitations is expired, and that all appeal objections of the defendant are dismissed and the decision is approved.” On the date of this last decision, as distinct from the two other decisions, above, on the date of performance of the act that is subject to this decision, the Misdemeanours Law was not in force. Accordingly, the Court of Cassation applied the statute of limitations as five years, regulated under the abrogated Turkish Penal Code.