Businessman Bulent Çebikker was among those who were allegedly defrauded by former Deniz Bank branch manager Cecil Erzan with promises of high-income funds. The bank claimed it was aware of the situation through Çebikker’s complaint.
Mr. Çevikar’s lawyer, Prof. Dr. Gift Ergin, filed a lawsuit against DenizBank and Erzan in Istanbul’s 12th Consumer Court, alleging that his customer may receive $2.118 million.
However, the case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, it being stated that the contract between the parties was for a “commercial purpose” and that for a transaction to be considered subject to consumer law, the consumer must not be acting for commercial or professional purposes. It was decided that the Commercial Court of First Instance had jurisdiction.
You might be interested in: District 9 is in trouble! Cecil Erzan and Bahar Candan get into a fight and end up in the infirmary.
Moved to appeal
Due to the parties’ objections to the decision, the file was sent to the Regional Court of Justice. The 4th Civil Chamber of the Regional Court of Justice also ruled that “the transaction is not a consumer transaction” and that the case is a “claim for a claim arising from a banking transaction”. The ruling stated that “the liability of the defendant bank was asserted within the scope of the Banking Act and the ruling was understood to have been in accordance with procedure and law”. Prof. Dr. Elgin assessed this decision as follows: “It is significant in that for the first time in a claim lawsuit filed against Denizbank, it clearly stated that the transaction was derived from a banking transaction.”
“This decision has nothing to do with fundamentals.”
A statement from Denizbank’s lawyers said: “This is in no way a judgment on the merits and in no way shows that the plaintiffs are in the right.”
You may be interested in: New developments in the Cecil Elzan case! Bank manager wiretapped. See the news.
The paper that Erzan signed and gave to Chevicel on Feb. 13, 2023, stated the “balance” was $2,195,000.
You may be interested: Witnesses were heard in the Cecil Erzan case. Arda Turan upset by the involvement of the prosecution authorities. See the news
“Employers also have a responsibility”
Doctor of Law, Istanbul Medipol University. Lecturer member Doluk Tutuk also assessed the decision: “This is more of a fraud than a banking transaction. The fraud was committed by a bank employee. In principle, if an employee commits fraud or harms someone during the course of their duties, you, the employer, are responsible. The documents prepared here must also be prepared in accordance with the Banking Law. Therefore, all these actions are transactions carried out under the Banking Law. For this reason, the court stated in its decision that it should be considered within the scope of the Banking Law. From this perspective, it can be said that the decision was correct. “There are also cases where bank employees commit fraud during the performance of their duties, and the employer may be held liable.”
