INDIVIDUALS AND BUSINESSES · OBJECTION AND LITIGATION
Legal support for administrative fines, suspension of activity and license or permit revocation decisions. We plan the objection and litigation process by assessing the basis of the sanction, the evidence, the forum to apply to and the time limit together.
Let’s Assess the Sanction DecisionAn administrative sanction is a fine or another administrative measure that the competent public authority imposes on the basis of a statute. Not every sanction is taken to the same court within the same time limit. Beyond the name of the decision, the statute it rests on, the authority that imposed it and whether another decision exists within the same administrative act also matter.
FILE REVIEW · LEGAL APPLICATION · FOLLOW-UP
Traffic, municipal and other administrative fines: the act, the addressee, the statutory basis and the route of recourse.
Objection to administrative fines · DetailsDecisions affecting the operation of a business, the conditions of enforcement and the need for interim protection.
Suspension of activity and closure · DetailsLegal review of permit suspension, license revocation and activities that depend on a document.
License and permit sanctions · DetailsExamination of findings, photographs, measurements, samples, records and defenses in their connection to the sanction.
Inspection record and evidence · DetailsLiability of legal entities, repeated sanctions, proportionality and special regulations.
Companies and sector-specific sanctions · DetailsAssessment of discounted payment, refund and collection actions together with the right to apply.
Payment, discount and collection stage · DetailsFor a decision within Article 27/1 of the Misdemeanors Law (Law No. 5326), unless there is a special provision, the time limit for applying to the criminal judgeship of peace (sulh ceza hâkimliği), running from notification or pronouncement.
Time limit, running from notification of the decision, against a judge’s decision open to objection under Article 29 of Law No. 5326. Finality and transitional provisions are examined separately.
For sanctions subject to administrative jurisdiction and under special laws, the forum, any mandatory prior application and the time limit may differ. A final day is not calculated automatically from the general table.
Basis: Law No. 5326, Articles 3 and 27–29; Law No. 7499, Article 37 and the transitional provision. For decisions issued on or after June 1, 2024, the Article 29 time limit is two weeks. It is not the same as the fifteen-day time limit for the first application.
For notification through UETS, the end-of-the-fifth-day rule under Article 7/a of Law No. 7201 on Notification is applied; the fact that the account has not been opened does not postpone the time limit automatically. Postal notification, in-person pronouncement and special electronic notice are checked separately. KEP and ordinary e-mail are not UETS. Keep the envelope, the delivery record and the electronic evidence record together with the decision itself.
You can open the section that relates to your need and review it. The route of recourse and the request are determined on the basis of your documents and the legislation that applies.
We examine by whom, where, when and with what evidence the alleged act was committed, and whether the fine was directed at the right natural person or legal entity. The competent authority, the calculation of the fine, the lower and upper limits and the clarity of the reasoning are assessed.
The provisions of the Misdemeanors Law on legal remedies apply unless other laws provide otherwise. The same application template is not used for all traffic, municipal, environmental, tourism, employment and social security sanctions. Tax penalties and disciplinary penalties are also kept separate, each under its own legal regime.
Suspension of activity, closure, sealing and the granting of time to remedy deficiencies are assessed separately. The inspection findings, earlier notifications, license conditions and the field of activity affected by the act are determined.
The business’s contracts, employees, reservations, supply obligations and losses arising from the interruption are documented. The conditions for a stay of execution in administrative jurisdiction are assessed separately. Filing an action does not by itself allow the seal to be lifted or the activity to be resumed.
A business license, a sector-specific permit and an operating certificate may not replace one another. We examine which document and which authority the sanction rests on, and whether an opportunity for defense or for remedying deficiencies is provided for.
A fine and another administrative decision may have been issued together in the same incident. The file is not divided among different forums before the connection under Article 27/8 of Law No. 5326 and the provisions of special laws are assessed. The annulment of one decision does not mean that all other acts fall away automatically.
The findings in the inspection record, the date, place, signature, and duty and authority information, and the measurement or sampling methods are compared with the other records in the file. We question which concrete act a general or template statement rests on.
The originals of existing camera footage, documents, licenses, and maintenance and inspection records are preserved. Instead of producing documents afterwards or altering records, evidence in your favor is secured in its existing state. If necessary, a technical expert examination and the production of the administrative file are requested.
The legal basis for directing the sanction at the company, the operator or the responsible person is examined. Authority of representation alone does not give rise to personal liability for every administrative fine; the special regulation and the concrete conduct are assessed together.
For more than one record or fine, the act, date, period, repetition and concurrence rules are checked. In fields subject to regulation such as environment, tourism, health, product safety, competition or personal data, a special application system is researched separately. The aim is not to apply the same text to all institutions, but to determine the legal basis of the act.
The payment and discount regime under Article 17 of Law No. 5326 is examined separately from the right to apply. Payment alone does not remove the right to apply under this Law. However, the discount condition, the last day of payment and the forum to apply to must be verified for the concrete sanction.
The enforcement of a favorable decision, the refund of the amount paid and ongoing collection actions are followed separately. A payment order or seizure that arrives later may give rise to a new act; having applied against the first fine does not automatically protect all later time limits. A collection dispute is assessed together with the public receivables file.
The type of sanction, the statute it rests on, the addressee and the application time limit are determined.
The act, authority, records, the calculation of the fine and documents in your favor are examined.
An objection or action is prepared together with an appropriate request for interim protection.
Legal remedies, refund, license and collection actions are followed.
At the first assessment, we clarify the scope of the act, the routes that can be used, the missing documents and any urgent need for protection. Fees and litigation costs are explained according to the scope of the work undertaken. The communication method for reporting developments in the process is determined; the application and enforcement steps after the decision are assessed separately.
Güneş & Güneş Law Firm was founded in Kemer in 1999 and has carried on its professional activity based in Antalya since 2007. In disputes across Türkiye, the forum for the application, representation and file follow-up are planned according to the concrete need.
The ability to communicate in Turkish, English, German and Russian supports foreign clients and Türkiye-related businesses in preparing documents and understanding the process. The method of consultation, online or in person, can be determined at the time of application.
No. Besides the general rule, distinctions such as the provision in a special law and the existence of another administrative decision within the same act are examined. It would not be correct to determine the forum without seeing the basis of the decision.
Payment under Law No. 5326 does not by itself remove the right to apply. The discount and payment conditions must also be checked separately; paying does not take the place of an application.
Not always. The application must be made to the right forum and in accordance with the regulation that applies. It should not be assumed that a general complaint or request for information automatically stops the time limit for bringing an action.
It cannot be said that it lifts the ban of its own accord. Depending on the type of sanction, interim protection and an applicable decision are required. A sealing or closure decision must not be violated.
What statement or delivery act the signature relates to is examined. A signature alone does not remove all legal objections; the whole of the signed text matters.
The review of the decision and the evidence, the defense, the objection or action, the necessary legal remedies and the enforcement of the decision are determined separately. Fees and expenses are explained according to the scope of the file; no guarantee of outcome is given.
Depending on the stage of the file and the request, the following provisions are assessed together.
This content is general information. Information and documents you share are kept confidential and used for legal assessment and within the agreed scope of service. An inquiry alone does not create an attorney–client relationship and does not stop time limits. The legal conditions of the specific matter are reviewed separately.