Indemnification of deny in enforcement and bankruptcy law

Denial indemnity, specific to Turkish Law, has been subject to many legal changes since its first implementation in 1928. The main purpose of these legal changes is to increase its deterrence and functionality and to increase its effectiveness in the judiciary. As it is known, right to legal remedies in Article 36 of the Constitution is not unlimited. Likewise, Article 29 of the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 obliges the parties to act correctly and honestly before the judicial authorities. From the standpoint of the Execution and Bankruptcy Act, within the framework of this obligation, the creditor should not initiate a follow-up for a non-existing receivable and the debtor should not resist monitoring for an existing receivable. A violation of conduct, contrast to this rule, has some serious negative effects on the legal system that makes it difficult to reach the truth, prolong the trial process and increase the workload. In order to eliminate or minimize these negativities, "denial indemnity" was arranged as a deterrent sanction in the Execution and Bankruptcy Law. The aim of this study is to present the evaluation of the 'denial indemnity' in Execution and Bankruptcy Law which is the reflection of the violation of the obligation to tell the truth and to act honestly from Islamic Law up to the present day, in the law, the conditions and application area of the law. Key words: Denial indemnity, debt enforcement, objection to debt enforcement, actions to set aside of objection