Subject of the Dispute: Recovery of Unjustifiably Retained Funds for Land Use.
Main Arguments of the Court:
1. The Appellate Court closed the proceedings due to jurisdiction rule violations, considering that the dispute should be heard in the commercial court.
2. The Court drew attention that closing proceedings due to jurisdictional issues is not grounds for automatic recovery of court expenses in favor of the respondent.
3. The Supreme Court emphasized that the final allocation of court expenses should occur in the commercial court based on the results of considering the case on its merits.
Court Decision: Revoke the additional resolution of the appellate court and deny compensation for legal assistance expenses.
