İDARENİN PERSONELİNİN HAKSIZ MUAMELELERİNDEN DOĞAN SORUMLULUĞUNA AMERİKAN FEDERAL YAKLAŞIMI
Birleşik Devletler Meclisi tarafından kabul edilen Federal Haksız Muamele İddiaları Yasası, bireylere, federal idare çalışanlarının Birleşik Devletler adına yürüttükleri görevleri kapsamında işledikleri belirli tiplerdeki haksız veya ihmali davranışlar neticesinde zarar görmeleri durumunda, federal idareyi dava etme hakkı verir. Yasa, bireylere federal idareyi dava etme hakkı verirken, açıkça Birleşik Devletlerin haksız muamelelere ilişkin yargı dokunulmazlığını ortadan kaldırır. Fakat, Meclis, bu yasayı kabul ederken, yasanın getirmiş olduğu bu yargı dokunulmazlığı feragatini bazı yasal istisnalar sağlayarak dengeler. Öyle ki bazı başka yasalar da açık veya zımni olarak Federal Haksız Fiil İddiaları Yasası kapsamında dava açılmasına engel olur. Bu çalışma, Türk yargı sistemi ve hukuki himaye mekanizmasının, Türk idaresinin haksız fiil sorumluluğu kavramına ilişkin alternatif ve yeni bir bakış açısı ve anlayışı kazanmasını sağlaması fikriyle, Federal Haksız Fiil Davaları Yasası’nın değerlendirilmesini içerir.
AMERICAN FEDERAL APPROACH TO TORT LIABILITY OF GOVERNMENT FOR ACTS OF ITS EMPLOYEES
The Federal Tort Claims Act, enacted by the United States Congress,allows people injured by the tortious or negligent acts of federal employeesto bring an action against the federal government for several types of tortsperpetrated by government employees while acting within the scope of theiremployment on behalf of the United States government. By allowing peopleto sue the federal government, the Federal Tort Claims Act clearly waivesthe sovereign immunity of the United States from legal actions regardingtort. However, while enacting this Act, Congress balanced this purpose withthe congressional interest in limiting that waiver by providing severalstatutory exceptions. Furthermore, several other statutes also preclude orhave been interpreted to preclude suits under the Federal Tort Claims Act.This study contains a review of the Federal Tort Claims Act for theTurkey’s judicial system and remedy mechanism to get an alternative andnew perspective on the interpretation and understanding of the concept oftort liability of Turkish government.
___
- Asimow, Michael R., Administrative Law, 14 th Edition, 2008, Thomson West Press, p.180.
- Atil, Ozge, Adopting the Citizen Suit Provision of the United States Clean Water Act as a Tool for Water Pollution Enforcement in Turkey, 2016-2017, J. Transnat'l L. & Pol'y, Vol.26, p. 108.
- Berkarda, Kemal, Amerika’da İdare Hukuku Var mı? [Is There Administartive Law in America?], 2000, İdare Hukuku ve İlimleri Dergisi [Journal of Administartive Law and Its Disciplines], Vol.13, p. 87, 107.
- Cann, Steven J., Administrative Law, 2006, Thousand Oaks, California, Sage Publications, p. 455.
- Conk, George W., Will the Post 911 World Be a Post-Tort World?, 2007, Penn St. L. Rev., Vol. 112, p. 247.
- Çağlayan, Ramazan, İdare Hukuku Dersleri [Administrative Law Courses], 5 th Edition, 2017, Ankara, Adalet Yayınevi [Justice Publications], p. 648.
- Figley, Paul F., Understanding the Federal Tort Claims Act: A Different Metaphor, 2009, Tort Trial & Ins. Prac. L.J., Vol. 44, p.1107.
- Figley, Paul F. / Tidmarsh, Jay, The Appropriations Power and Sovereign Immunity, 2009, Mich.L.Rev., Vol. 107, p. 1207.
- Fox, William F., Understanding Administrative Law, 5 th Edition, 2008, Newark, NJ, Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., p. 327.
- Gannon, John S, Federal Tort Claims Act-Seeking Redress Against the Sovereign: Balancing the Rights of Plaintiffs and the Government When Applying Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c) to FTCA Claims, 2007, W. New Eng. L. Rev., Vol. 30, p. 232-33.
- Gottlieb, Irvin M., Tort Claims Against the United States, 1942, Geo. L. J., Vol. 30, p. 464.
- Gözübüyük, Şeref / Tan, Turgut, İdare Hukuku Cilt 1 Genel Esaslar [Administartive Law Book 1 General Principles], 11 th Edition, 2016, Kızılay, Ankara, Turhan Kitabevi Yayınları [Turhan Bookstore Publications], p. 729-31.
- Harrington, Christine B. / Carter, Lief H., Administrative Law and Politics, 4 th Edition, 2009, 2300 N Street, Washington, DC, CQ Press, p. 337.
- Jr., Richard J. Pierce, Administrative Law, 2008, Hudson Street, New York, Foundation Press, p. 167.
- Kalabalık, Halil, Kısa İdare Hukuku [Brief Administrative Law], 2 th Edition, 2016, Konya, Sayram Yayınları [Sayram Publications], p. 272.
- Niles, Mark C., “Nothing but Mischief”: The Federal Tort Claims Act and the Scope of Discretionary Immunity, 2002, Admin L. Rev., Vol. 54, p. 1275.
- Read, Daniel Shane, The Court’s Difficult Balancing Act to be Fair to Both Plaintiff and Government Under the FTCA’s Administrative Claims Process, 2005, Baylor L. Rev., Vol. 57, p. 785, 89.
- Rosenthal, Lawrence, A Theory of Governmental Damages Liability: Torts, Constitutional Torts, and Takings, 2007, U. Pa. J. Const. L., Vol. 9, p.801.
- Tan, Turgut, İdare Hukuku [Administrative Law], 5 th Edition, 2016, Kızılay, Ankara, Turhan Kitabevi Yayınları [Turhan Bookstore Publications], p.438-41.
- Tek, Savaş, İdare Hukukunda İdarenin Sorumluluğu [Governmental Liability in Administrative Law], 2010, Türkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi [Journal of Turkey Justice Academy], Vol. 1, p. 315-16.
- Wexler, Elena, Note, Section 2401(B) Reconfigured: Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs Leads to the Right Result for the Wrong Reasons, 2006, Fordham L. Rev., Vol. 74, p.2933.
- ISSN: 1303-4650
- Başlangıç: 2004
- Yayıncı: Yeditepe Üniversitesi adına Prof. Sultan Tahmazoğlu Üzeltürk