I Have Been Sued: What Should I Do? Response Deadlines, Objections and Evidence

When you learn that a civil lawsuit has been filed against you, your first task is to identify the type of document you received and the date of service, and then to review the lawsuit petition, its annexes and the deadlines set by the court together. In written and simplified proceedings under the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (HMK), the deadline to respond to a lawsuit petition is, as a rule, two weeks from service. However, additional periods, the rules on submitting evidence and the steps that may be taken are not the same in every case. The fact that the hearing date lies in the future does not mean you may wait until then to respond. [1]

An envelope delivered to your door can suddenly bring new worry into your life. Reading the claims in the petition may create a sense of injustice, anger or uncertainty. Even so, the lawsuit petition is the other party's account; it is not yet a judgment. Defense begins by calmly analyzing that account and by presenting your own explanation to the court on time, with concrete facts and lawful evidence.

This guide is aimed in particular at preparing a person who is the defendant in receivables, compensation and contract disputes. In criminal proceedings, the defense of an accused person, a response in administrative litigation and an objection to a payment order in enforcement proceedings are governed by different rules. In family, employment, consumer and other private law fields, the provisions specific to the dispute must also be reviewed separately.

Read the document you received correctly: a lawsuit petition or another notice?

The content of a service notice matters as much as its heading

Service is the means by which a judicial act is notified to you; it is not the name of a single type of document. The same envelope may contain a lawsuit petition, annexes, a preliminary review record and a hearing summons. Mark separately which court and which file the document comes from, your status as a party, the relief requested and the steps you are asked to take. Reading only the short description on the envelope is not enough.

In the lawsuit petition, first look at the claim and the relief sought: are you being asked for money, for the eviction of a property, or for a declaration that a transaction is invalid? Then examine the facts, dates and documents on which the claim is based. Keep apart the claims for interest, litigation costs and attorney's fees. If the claim concerns only a specific part of a receivable, do not treat the first amount written as the absolute upper limit of the total dispute risk; any increase in the claim and the applicable transitional provisions are assessed separately. [1]

Table 1: First review according to the document received

If annexes are missing or the file is visible only on UYAP

The contract, invoice or account statement mentioned in the petition may not have reached you. Identify the gap precisely: which annex, how many pages, and for which part of the defense is it needed? Request copies from the case file and, if necessary, a review of the service procedure. Asking for annexes or contacting the court registry does not mean that the response period is suspended. If you need an additional period, justify that request separately and within the statutory period.

The UYAP Citizen Portal may be used to track files and procedural steps. However, seeing a file on the inquiry screen does not in every case mean that service was validly made. Conversely, the fact that you have not yet seen the physical envelope does not prove that service was not made: electronic notification or other delivery methods accepted by law may be involved. Review the inquiry result together with the service record in the file. [1, 2, 8]

How is the service date and response period calculated?

Keep the envelope, the service receipt and the electronic record

The starting point for calculating the period is not the date on which the document was written or posted, but the date of service determined under the applicable rule. For physical service, it matters who received the document, in what capacity and when; the nature of the address; and the statements in the service receipt (mazbata). Do not throw away the envelope. Keep both its front and back, together with any enclosures, legible; if necessary, obtain the service receipt from the file. In matters followed through a lawyer, the rule on service to the lawyer and the special exceptions must also be checked. [2]

The assumption "I did not sign, so the period does not start" is not safe. Where the statutory conditions are met, service on a person living in the same residence, on an employee or on the neighborhood head (muhtar) may have legal effect. In acts under Article 21 of the Notification Law No. 7201 (Tebligat Kanunu), the affixing of a notice to the door and other procedural requirements are important; the fact that you actually received the document from the neighborhood head later does not, by itself, move the service date to that day. On the other hand, not every delivery through a neighborhood head is automatically considered valid. The outcome is determined by examining the service receipt and the concrete circumstances. [2]

In electronic service, arrival, reading and service dates differ

Under Article 7/a of the Notification Law, electronic service is deemed to have been made at the end of the fifth day following the date on which the document reached the recipient's electronic address. Read together the records of arrival in UETS and of the date on which service is deemed legally made. Do not confuse opening the document on the first day with the fifth-day rule; not opening the account at all does not cancel the effects of service. [2, 3]

An SMS or e-mail serves only as a notification of documents that have reached UETS. Under Article 10/3 of the Electronic Notification Regulation (Elektronik Tebligat Yönetmeliği), failure or delay in this notification does not affect the validity of electronic service. For this reason, waiting only for a telephone notice is not a sufficient method of follow-up. Calculating the legal service date from the date of arrival in UETS, and from there the response period under the relevant procedure, are two separate steps. [3]

Two weeks is not calculated in business days

Under Article 92 of the HMK, a period set in weeks ends at the end of the corresponding day of the last week, at the close of business. Public holidays count toward the period; if the last day falls on a public holiday, Article 93 of the HMK applies. Do not replace "two weeks" with "ten business days" or "fifteen days". For electronic procedures, take into account the end-of-day rule in Article 445 of the HMK and the valid transmission conditions of the system in use. [1]

Hypothetical example: Where a physical service was validly made on a Tuesday, and there is no special period provision or effect of judicial recess, the last day of the two-week period is the Tuesday of the second week. If the last day is a public holiday, the rule for the first business day applies. This example does not replace review of the service record in the actual file.

Judicial recess does not suspend periods in every file. Under Articles 102 to 104 of the HMK, it is examined whether the case or matter is subject to judicial recess and whether the end of the statutory period falls within the recess. For example, there are special provisions for actions brought by employees on the basis of an employment contract and for interim legal protection matters. Do not act on the idea that "it is summer, so the deadline does not run." [1]

The concrete result under Article 104 of the HMK is this: in cases and matters subject to judicial recess, if the end of a period set by the HMK falls within the recess, the period is deemed extended without any further decision by one week from the day the recess ends. This rule does not mean that all periods stop running during the recess. Nor does it apply automatically to every period set by a judge or to every application period under other laws. Rather than simply marking the recess dates on your calendar, record which period has been extended and under which provision. [1]

How long is there to file a response petition, and how is an additional period requested?

The distinction between written proceedings and simplified proceedings

Under Article 127 of the HMK, for written proceedings, and Article 317, for simplified proceedings, the response to a lawsuit petition is, as a rule, two weeks. The procedure to be applied is determined by the type of dispute and by specific statutory provisions. A high value of the claim does not always mean that written proceedings apply, and "simplified" proceedings do not indicate that the matter is of little legal importance. [1]

Table 2: Separation of deadlines for the response and follow-up steps

Explain the reasons and follow the decision given

An additional period may be requested where preparing the response petition within the existing period is very difficult or impossible. For example, if comparing records from different branches, a comprehensive review of accounts, or obtaining a specific document from another institution is needed, explain how these relate to the defense. Rather than saying in general terms "the file is extensive", state the missing record, the work to be done and why it cannot fit within the existing period. [1]

A request being made does not mean that the period has been extended. Follow whether the decision accepts or rejects the request, how many days, weeks or months of additional period have been granted, and the end date. Do not assume that the maximum period in the law is the period the court will certainly grant. Also, the start of the additional period is not the day the decision reaches you; under the law, it is the end of the main response period. [1, 5]

The Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu), in its decision of 15 February 2022, E.2021/855, K.2022/129, examined a case in which an arbitration plea was submitted within the period requested for an additional period, where no decision had been made on the request for an additional period. The Assembly did not treat the unanswered request as accepted; it did not endorse the dismissal on procedural grounds resulting from the late first objection. This case shows the importance of following the outcome of a request for additional time. Different situations, in which the court actually granted an additional period or breached a duty to notify, cannot be disposed of by assuming the same result. [5]

If no response is filed, is the action automatically lost?

Being deemed to have denied the facts is not a prepared defense

No. Under Article 128 of the HMK, a defendant who does not respond within the period is deemed to have denied all the facts in the lawsuit petition. This result does not mean that the action is automatically accepted. The claimant must still prove the contested facts for which the burden of proof lies on the claimant; the court is also bound to examine the conditions for the action and the legal assessment. [1]

Even so, a general denial does not perform the function of a response petition that describes facts in your favor, sets out preliminary objections and presents evidence on time. The defense "no such contract was concluded" is not the same as the defense "the contract was concluded but I paid the debt". The second relies on a fact that ends the debt. Whether that fact was already in the file, at what stage it was raised and when the evidence was submitted all become important.

Your status as a defendant does not end because you did not respond. The ability to follow the file, attend the hearing and make statements on the evaluation of the existing claim and evidence is not completely removed. However, you may face procedural limits with regard to new defense facts and new evidence. The first task after the period has passed is not to withdraw from the file, but to determine which opportunities remain. [1]

On late evidence, the facts of the decision and the exceptions must be read together

In its decision of 20 April 2016, E.2014/695, K.2016/522, the Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu) considered a case in which a defendant who had not responded and not submitted evidence on time requested a period to present evidence during the investigation phase. The majority found it appropriate not to grant the period, because in the concrete case the conditions of HMK Articles 145 and 141 had not been invoked. In the deliberations, different views were expressed in favor of the right to be heard and of evidence that rebuts the denial; the majority did not accept them. [6]

The decision concerns a divorce dispute and includes the texts of Articles 140 and 141 as they stood before 2020. For this reason, the procedural description of the earlier preliminary review should not be used as the current rule on the time limit. Today, Article 139/1-c and Article 140/5 are read together for completion of documents, and current Article 141 is read for new defense. [1, 6]

Academic writing has also discussed the evidentiary position of a defendant who does not respond. The study by Cenk Akil emphasizes that the period for completing documents at the preliminary review is not an unlimited right to new evidence, and that exceptions such as Article 145 must be assessed separately. The debate should not be reduced to two absolute statements, "no evidence may be submitted" or "every evidence may be submitted later". [7]

How are the requirements for the action, preliminary objections and the merits defense separated?

Not every defense is raised at the same time and with the same result

Saying "I object" to everything in a petition does not remove legal distinctions. The court's duty to examine the requirements for the action, such as subject-matter jurisdiction, exclusive jurisdiction, the parties' and the claimant's capacity to sue, legal interest, lis pendens and res judicata, is governed by Articles 114 and 115 of the HMK. The fact that the court examines these on its own initiative does not make it unnecessary for the defendant to document and explain a concrete deficiency. Some deficiencies can be remedied, while others may lead to dismissal on procedural grounds. [1]

A non-exclusive jurisdiction objection and an arbitration plea are preliminary objections under Articles 116 and 117 of the HMK. Preliminary objections must be included together in the response petition filed within the period. Once the response has been filed, a preliminary objection cannot be added by a separate petition even if your main period has not yet expired; HMK Article 131 regulates this expressly. In a jurisdiction objection, do not overlook the need to state the court you consider competent, or, where several options exist, the court you have chosen. [1]

The statement "I am not a party to the contract" concerns, as a rule, status as a party under substantive law. Do not confuse it with the absence of capacity to be a party or to sue. For example, whether a company's debt is claimed from its manager, and whether a signature was given as a personal undertaking, representation or suretyship, must be examined separately. Merely being connected with a company does not by itself create personal liability; nevertheless, the concrete ground of liability is separately investigated.

Table 3: Relationship between the type of defense and the form of examination

The limitation plea and the preclusive period are different

Under Article 161 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (TBK), the court cannot take account of the statute of limitations on its own initiative unless it is raised. For this reason, do not stop at saying only that "the action is based on an old event". Examine which start date applies to which receivable, and whether there are grounds for interruption or suspension. Also consider the possibility that the other side relies on an acknowledgment of debt, an earlier enforcement step or another ground of interruption. [4]

The consequence of a preclusive period and the manner in which it is examined are determined by the relevant special provision. Treating every period as a statute of limitations leads to the wrong defense. The nature of the right matters as much as the name of the dispute; different claims arising from the same event may be subject to different periods.

The limit on expanding the defense later

In written proceedings, Article 141 of the HMK regulates expansion or change of the claims and defenses through the reply and the response to the reply; as a rule, the prohibition begins once the mutual petitions have been submitted. In simplified proceedings, under Article 319, the prohibition on expanding or changing the defense begins with the filing of the response petition. The rules on amendment (ıslah) and on the express consent of the other side are reserved; however, these do not constitute a general permission that remedies every missed procedural step. [1]

An amendment of a response petition that was never filed is not the same as the amendment of a filed one. In particular, for a late limitation defense, a first objection or a new fact, the suitability of an amendment must be examined in light of the file. The sentence "I reserve my defenses" does not remove statutory limits. Nor should the explanation of a legal characterization be confused with the introduction of a new factual event.

How should the response petition and the evidence file be prepared?

Create a clear link between the claim, the response and the evidence

Article 129 of the HMK lists, among the elements of the response petition, clear summaries of the facts on which the defense rests, the evidence by which each fact will be proved, the legal grounds and a clear statement of relief. The court and file information, the parties, addresses, details of representation and the signature must also be checked. The completion period of one week provided in Article 130 for specific formal defects in the law is not a right to remedy all defects in the defense later. [1]

Build the backbone of the defense on a chronological timeline of events. When was the contract made? Who signed it? What was delivered? To which debt does each payment relate? When did the other side object? The answers to these questions make it easier to distinguish which claim has been accepted and which has been rejected, and on what grounds. Do not put forward an explanation that you know to be untrue merely because you think it will bring a tactical advantage; Article 29 of the HMK sets out the duty of good faith and of truthful statements. [1]

Hypothetical example: The claimant asserts that no part of the service fee was ever paid; you state that you made a partial payment. The existence of a bank receipt is a starting point. However, the recipient, the date, the description and the invoice to which it is matched must be shown. The claimant may argue that the transfer relates to another debt. For this reason, the payment table, the correspondence and the debt items must be examined together. The fact that a document exists matters as much as the fact that it proves a particular event.

Submit the response to the correct file and verify the record of the filing

Under Article 126 of the HMK, the response petition is submitted to the court where the action was filed. For physical submission, deliver the signed petition and its annexes in proper form, and check the rule on copies for the number of claimants and the annex list. Confirm the court name and the case number; keep the copy showing the date and registration of the submitted document. Do not assume that a petition filed in the wrong file will reach the correct file within the period. [1]

In electronic submission, the secure electronic signature and the UYAP operating conditions under Article 445 of the HMK apply. Viewing the file through e-Devlet is not the same act as duly sending the response petition. Do not treat an ordinary e-mail or a draft saved on your computer as a petition submitted to the court. Check that the signing and sending steps have been completed, that a record has been created in the correct file and that the annexes have opened; keep the transaction record. If you encounter a technical problem, preserve the error record and consider the valid method of submission that can be used within the period; do not accept that the problem by itself grants a new period. [1, 8]

Assess the burden of proof and the lawfulness of the evidence

Under Article 190 of the HMK, unless the law provides a special rule, a party who derives a right in its favor from a fact bears the burden of proving it. Being a defendant does not mean that the burden of proof lies with the claimant on every point. Defenses such as payment or release may require proof in their own right. However, the defendant's counter-proof does not, merely because it has been undertaken, shift the principal burden of proof to the defendant; Article 191 preserves this distinction. [1]

An e-mail, message, photograph or data record may be a document within the meaning of Article 199 of the HMK; however, not every screenshot is undisputed and sufficient proof. What is assessed is to whom the message belongs, its integrity, its chronological order and whether it was lawfully obtained. Do not detach a correspondence from its context; keep the original file and, where possible, the source record. Do not try to collect evidence by entering another person's account without permission. Evidence obtained unlawfully cannot be taken into account under Article 189/2 of the HMK. Special limitations, such as proof by a written instrument and the rules on proof against a written instrument, may also apply separately. [1]

Table 4: Relationship between documents and procedure in preparing evidence

Indicating evidence and submitting it later are not the same

Relying in the response on a document that you do not yet have, and explaining where it will be obtained, is different from not mentioning that evidence at all and wishing to use it later. The firm time limit under Article 139/1-c of the HMK concerns the submission or procurement of documents that were indicated in the petitions but not submitted, and the explanation required for that purpose. It should not be seen as a general second opportunity to freely complete an evidence list that was left blank at the outset. In simplified proceedings, the explicit evidence-notification regime of Article 318 is particularly important. [1]

When it comes to a witness, do not stop at writing a name; state the event about which you ask for the person to be heard. Observe the list rules of Article 240 of the HMK and the prohibition on a second list. An oath as evidence (yemin delili) should not be added to the file at random either: the facts suitable for an oath, the time of reliance and the consequences of the offer are considered together. If preservation of evidence requires an inspection or a determination, examine the conditions under Article 400 of the HMK and following, rather than waiting for the hearing. [1]

Separate denial of a signature from the defense on the debt

"I paid this debt", "the amount written in the document is wrong" and "the signature in the document is not mine" are different defenses. If you deny the writing or signature said to be yours, state clearly which part of which document you are contesting, and consider the provisions on examination of forgery under Articles 208 to 211 of the HMK. The examination of a denial of a private written instrument and of an official deed, and the effect of that denial on the use of the document, are not the same. Do not limit yourself to saying "I object" for each document. [1]

An examination may require the original of the document and writings or signatures suitable for comparison. Where the court summons you personally for this purpose, read the warning in the summons carefully: under Article 211 of the HMK, failing to attend an examination of a party (isticvap) summons that contains the required warning may lead to the writing or signature denied being deemed admitted. In addition, a claim of forgery of a promissory note does not by itself remove a precautionary measure ordered on the basis of that note. Do not use a false denial of a signature as a method of defense. [1]

When do a counterclaim, set-off and offsetting arise?

Having your own receivable does not automatically produce a judgment in your favor

Asking, as defendant, for the dismissal of the action is different from asking for a judgment ordering the other side to perform in your favor. Under Article 132 of the HMK, a counterclaim requires that the main action be pending and that there be a set-off or offsetting relationship, or a connection, between the claims. The counterclaim is brought in the response petition or in a separate petition within the period for a response on the merits. If it is brought after the period, it is separated under Article 133; this does not allow the conclusion that the substantive right has in every case come to an end. [1]

Because a counterclaim contains an independent claim, conditions such as jurisdiction by subject matter, territorial jurisdiction, legal interest, court fees and, where applicable, mandatory mediation as a condition precedent to litigation must be checked separately. The fact that the main action has been filed does not by itself complete all the preconditions of the counter-claim. Nor does the later termination of the main action by itself prevent a properly brought counterclaim from being heard. [1, 10]

Set-off and offsetting are not the same transaction

Set-off (takas) is a right which, when its conditions are met, can extinguish reciprocal debts to the extent that they correspond to each other. Under Article 139 of the TBK and following, reciprocity, the nature of the obligations, maturity, the declaration of set-off and statutory exceptions are examined. For some receivables, set-off is not possible without the consent of the creditor. The bare statement "I also have a claim" is not regarded as a sufficient assessment. [4]

Offsetting (mahsup), on the other hand, may refer to the deduction of a payment or item that must be taken into account within an account, according to the concrete relationship. For example, deducting a payment made against the same invoice debt is not the same legal structure as set-off of a counter-receivable arising from a separate contract. The nature of the claim, the timing of the defense and its proof must each be determined separately.

Hypothetical example: Assume that 100,000 TL is claimed from you and you have a counter-receivable of 140,000 TL that is suitable for set-off. A set-off defense whose conditions are proved may defeat the claim to the corresponding extent; however, it does not ensure that a judgment for collection in your favor is entered for the remaining 40,000 TL. For that, a suitable claim and, where necessary, a counterclaim or a separate action are required. The example assumes that interest, costs and special set-off prohibitions will be examined separately.

How are the preliminary review record, interim decisions and the hearing followed?

Create a separate schedule of steps instead of a single deadline

The preliminary review record may contain decisions on the conduct of the proceedings at the start of the file. Unlike the response period, there may be obligations to submit documents, to make statements or to deposit costs. For each line, answer the questions: "to whom does the step apply, when does the period start, is it firm, and what happens if it is not done?" Do not confuse the period granted to the claimant with your own period, or the other side's period for action with your response period.

As regards the firm period set by the judge, Article 94 of the HMK contains rules on the explanation of the step and its consequences. However, it is not a sound method to omit a step on the assumption that a warning is invalid. Where there is uncertainty, request clarification or correction in good time, and complete the possible step without delay. Confirm that the petition and its annexes submitted to the file have been recorded. [1]

Check the duty to notify the insurer and to give notice to a third party

If you lose the case and recourse against a third party may be sought, or that person may seek recourse against you, the notice of the action to a third party (davanın ihbarı) under Articles 61 to 64 of the HMK should be considered. Notice may be given until the investigation has concluded; the written notice sets out the reasons and the stage of the proceedings. Nevertheless, waiting for the final stage may reduce the time in which the person concerned could contribute to the defense. Notice does not by itself make the third party a defendant and, as a rule, does not bring about a stay of proceedings. Giving notice and making a claim against that person are different steps. [1]

Where the dispute may fall within a liability insurance policy, examine the policy and the special conditions as well. Article 1475 of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 (TTK) requires that the event giving rise to liability be notified to the insurer within ten days, and that a claim made against the insured be notified immediately unless otherwise agreed. For a failure or delay in notification, the increase of the compensation under Article 1446/2–3, the fault and the criteria of the insurer's prior knowledge are important; not every delay means the automatic loss of all cover. Sending documents to the insurer does not replace the step of responding to the court. Under Article 1476 of the TTK, whether the insurer will take over the defense, and what steps must be taken in the meantime, must also be followed. [11]

If there is an interim injunction or attachment, assess it separately

An interim legal protection order may have consequences before a final judgment is given on the main action. Preparing a response petition does not replace a separate application against a measure. For example, under Article 394 of the HMK, for an interim injunction issued without hearing the other side, a one-week period for objection is provided: from the enforcement for a party who is present, and from service of the enforcement record for a party who is absent. The subject of the objection, the form of the decision and the means of challenge must be examined concretely. Unless the court orders otherwise, an objection does not stop enforcement. [1]

A precautionary attachment (ihtiyati haciz), by contrast, is a separate institution governed by the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004 (İcra ve İflas Kanunu). The one-week rule for an injunction cannot be transferred word for word to all attachment and enforcement acts. Identify the decision on which a restriction on a bank account or a note in a land registry entry is based; examine the decision together with the service and enforcement documents. Concealing assets or altering records is not a method of legal defense.

Not attending the hearing does not dispose of the case

Failure to attend a hearing after a duly issued summons may, where the conditions are met, lead to the proceedings continuing in your absence. The warnings and consequences under Articles 147 and 150 of the HMK are assessed according to the participation of the parties and the request to proceed. Measures such as an examination of a party (isticvap) or an oath, in which the court calls the person personally, are not the same as representation by a lawyer. A general conclusion such as "I have a lawyer, so I never need to attend under any circumstances" cannot be drawn. [1]

Follow which issues were accepted as disputed at the preliminary review, and whether your requests were correctly recorded in the minutes. Record in writing any new interim decisions issued after the hearing. Subsequent steps, such as an objection to an expert report or a legal remedy against the decision, have their own separate periods; filing the first response petition does not complete the monitoring of the file.

If you missed the response period, which routes should be examined?

First determine whether the period has really expired

The first review is of valid service and of the correct calculation of the period. The service step in the file may be irregular, an incorrect date may have been taken from the electronic record, or an applicable rule on judicial recess may have been overlooked. Article 32 of the Notification Law (Tebligat Kanunu) governs, for irregular service, the recipient's knowledge and the date of knowledge that the recipient declares. A dispute about the date of knowledge is addressed within the framework of the records in the file and the available means of challenge. Do not declare a false date. [1, 2]

An irregularity in service is not a problem that is resolved in every case by writing a single sentence in an unrelated petition. The authority before which the outcome is sought, and the procedure and period to which it relates, must be stated. It may be necessary to present the service document, the address and delivery information, and the records showing knowledge together. While conducting this review, do not delay the defense steps that are still possible.

Restoration to the previous position (eski hâle getirme) is an exceptional route for which conditions must exist

Under Articles 95 to 97 of the HMK, a person who could not act within the statutory period, or the period fixed by the judge as firm, for reasons beyond their control may apply for restoration (eski hâle getirme). Where the same result can be reached by another legal route, this route cannot be used. The application must be made within two weeks from the removal of the obstacle, and the omitted step must be completed within the period set for this application. It is not enough merely to ask for the period to be restored. [1]

Explain, with evidence or indications, what the obstacle was, when it began and ended, and why the step could not be taken. The existence of a serious health problem, for example, is not by itself a ground for automatic acceptance; whether the event actually prevented the step from being taken is examined. Forgetting, disregarding the paperwork or assuming that a matter would be settled with the other side does not, in itself, constitute a reason beyond one's control.

In first-instance and appellate proceedings, the application may, as a rule, be made until the final decision. Article 96/2 of the HMK contains a special provision for periods missed during the investigation after a final decision given in the absence of a party. That provision does not mean that every missed response period can be recovered after the decision. The application does not by itself stay the proceedings or the enforcement; the decision conditions in Article 99 apply. [1]

Distinguish late submission of evidence from raising a new defense

Article 145 of the HMK provides that the court may grant permission where the late submission is not intended to delay the proceedings or where the failure to raise it in time is not attributable to the fault of the party. The alternative conditions in the law should not be combined into a formulation that requires both to be present together. Nevertheless, permission is not automatic; the nature of the evidence, the reason for the delay and the stage of the file must be explained. [1]

The admissibility of evidence does not mean that a new defense fact that it is intended to prove will necessarily be heard. For a new defense fact, Article 141 or Article 319 is considered; for the timing of the evidence, Article 145 is considered together. Objecting to the sufficiency of the claimant's existing evidence, pointing out a condition of the action that the court must examine on its own initiative, discussing a document already in the file and raising a new fact of payment are not the same procedural act. This distinction determines the room for manoeuvre that remains in a file where the period has passed.

How are costs, working with a lawyer and settlement options assessed?

Discuss the cost of the defense and the communication arrangements from the start

Being a defendant does not mean that there is no risk of litigation costs. The advance on evidence costs (delil avansı), the expert or inspection fees, the court fee for a counterclaim, the lawyer's fee agreed in the contract and the attorney's fee award (vekâlet ücreti) that may be awarded in favor of the other side are separate items. Article 324 of the HMK regulates the consequences of not depositing an advance on evidence costs, and Article 326 and following regulate the imposition of costs. The cost effect of a partial acceptance of the action is not the same as that of full acceptance. The calculation must be made for the specific file on the basis of the current tariffs and the nature of the claim. [1]

As a rule, a person with capacity to sue may pursue the action personally or through a representative, subject to special provisions. A person with insufficient means may consider, separately as to scope and conditions, court-ordered legal aid under Article 334 of the HMK and following, and the legal aid service of the bar association. Do not assume that the response period is automatically extended because an application has been made. [1, 9]

When working with a lawyer, expressly confirm that the documents you have sent have been received, whether the matter has been taken on, the key deadlines and the documents that are required from you. Do not assume that sending a file means that its follow-up has been taken on. The lawyer, for their part, must explain matters clearly, inform you of important developments and respond to the client's questions within a reasonable communication arrangement. Explaining why a step is to be taken, rather than dismissing the client's concern, is part of sound work. [4]

Conducting negotiations does not automatically remove the need to act in court

Settlement may allow both parties to produce a solution after assessing their evidentiary and cost risks. However, do not let a statutory period pass in reliance on the other side's statement "we will reach an agreement, you do not need to respond". Negotiation between the parties is different from special mechanisms such as a postponement order that a court may issue after an action has been brought in mediation. The procedure of postponement by the court under Article 15/5 of Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes (HUAK) is also to be assessed separately in the concrete file. [1, 10]

The agreement should clearly state the amount of the debt, interest, maturity, instalments, security, costs, the fate of the existing action and enforcement proceedings, and the consequences of a breach. The phrase "the case will close" does not explain the difference between settlement (sulh), waiver of claim (feragat), acknowledgment of claim (kabul) and withdrawal of the action. These steps have different consequences. For certain steps taken through a lawyer, the requirement of special authority under Article 74 of the HMK is also checked. [1]

How should the defendant's preparation table be used?

The table below is not taken from a real file; it shows a method of preparation. Open a separate row for each claim. Determine the step to be taken and the person responsible; keep the date on which the step was completed and the record of its submission to the file. Do not confuse the working targets in the table with the statutory periods set by the court. Deadline records should contain, together, the supporting document, the date of service and the verified last day.

Table 5: Working table for claims, defense and steps to be taken

Conclusion

Being sued does not mean that the other side's claims are correct. However, a defense cannot be built merely by believing that you are in the right. The type of document, the valid service date, the procedure to be applied, the first objections and the plan for proof must be considered together.

The most valuable work in the first days is to keep the envelope and records, read every petition and annex, determine the response to each claim and verify the deadlines. If you need an additional period, request it in good time and follow the decision; if a period has been missed, investigate which opportunities genuinely remain. The right of defense is used effectively through steps that are taken on time, whose records are preserved and whose outcome is followed.

Frequently Asked Questions

What should I do first when a lawsuit petition arrives?

Keep the envelope and the annexes; identify the court, the file number, your status and the service date. Read the petition together with the preliminary review and interim decisions, and calculate the response period and other procedural periods separately. Return to the section on reading the document received.

How long is the period to respond to a lawsuit petition?

In written and simplified proceedings under the HMK, the rule is two weeks from service of the lawsuit petition. This is not ten business days or fifteen days. The special provision, the method of service and the effect of judicial recess are checked separately. Review the calculation of the period.

I requested an additional period; is my response period extended?

No. The request must be made within the main response period and must be accepted by the court. An additional period is at most one month in written proceedings and at most two weeks in simplified proceedings; it may be granted once and starts from the end of the main period. Return to the section on the additional period.

If I do not respond, am I deemed to have accepted the claim?

No. Under Article 128 of the HMK, you are deemed to have denied the facts asserted. However, serious limits may arise with regard to preliminary objections, new defense facts and evidence. Do not abandon the follow-up of the action. Review the consequences of not responding.

Does the date of a service I received late from the neighborhood head change?

Receiving the document late does not, by itself, change the date. The conditions of the procedure under Article 21 of the Notification Law No. 7201 (Tebligat Kanunu) and the service receipt are examined; if there is an irregularity, the question of knowledge and the means of challenge is also dealt with under Article 32. Return to the explanation of the service records.

I did not open the UETS notice; does the period still run?

Yes. In a validly made electronic service, not opening the account does not prevent the legal consequence. Service is deemed made at the end of the fifth day following arrival at the electronic address. Do not wait on the assumption that no SMS has arrived. Read the section on electronic service.

Can I add a jurisdiction objection after filing the response petition?

A first objection concerning non-exclusive jurisdiction must appear in the response filed within the period. Under Article 131 of the HMK, once the response has been filed, a first objection cannot be added even if the period has not yet expired. Exclusive jurisdiction and subject-matter jurisdiction are assessed separately as requirements for the action. Compare the types of defense.

Can I submit evidence I have now at a later stage?

Completing a document that was previously indicated is different from relying on a new piece of evidence. The completion under Article 139 of the HMK and the exceptional permission conditions in Article 145 are examined separately. Do not postpone the notification of evidence on the basis that "I will bring it to the hearing". Review the preparation of evidence.

If I also have a receivable, must I file a counterclaim?

Not in every case. First separate whether the aim is only to meet the counter-claim by set-off, to have a payment on the same account offset, or to obtain a separate judgment for collection in your favor. If a counterclaim is needed, the period and the requirements of the action apply separately. Return to the section on counterclaims and set-off.

I missed the response period; can I request a new period?

An ordinary request for an additional period must be made within the main period. If the period has passed, the valid service and the calculation are checked; if the conditions are met, restoration to the previous position (eski hâle getirme) is considered. This route is not automatic and is subject to special conditions, including the two-week application period from the removal of the obstacle. Read the section on missed periods.

Can I skip responding while trying to reach an agreement with the other side?

Conducting negotiations does not automatically stop the statutory period. Do not postpone the response in the absence of a suitable court decision or a special provision applicable to the concrete case. The effect of any agreement on the existing action must be clearly regulated. Review the settlement options.

The hearing is months away; must I start preparing now?

Yes. The deadlines for the response and for notifying evidence may expire before the hearing. Separate periods may apply to interim decisions and to steps arising from the preliminary review. Do not track the hearing date and the response date as if they were a single date. Return to the file-tracking section.

Sources and legal bases

[1] Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu), in particular Articles 19, 27, 29, 61–64, 71, 74, 90–104, 109, 114–117, 121–145, 147, 150, 176 et seq., 189–194, 199–203, 208–211, 225 et seq., 240, 316–322, 324–340, 394, 400 et seq. and 445. Ministry of Justice, Mevzuat Information System, consolidated text.

[2] Notification Law No. 7201 (Tebligat Kanunu), in particular Articles 7/a, 11–13, 16–17, 21, 23, 25–25/a and 32. Mevzuat Information System.

[3] Electronic Notification Regulation (Elektronik Tebligat Yönetmeliği), Official Gazette: 6 December 2018, No. 30617; in particular Articles 9/6 and 10. Mevzuat Information System, consolidated text.

[4] Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (Türk Borçlar Kanunu), in particular Articles 139–145, 154, 161, 506 and 508. Mevzuat Information System.

[5] Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu), 15 February 2022, E.2021/855, K.2022/129; in particular reasoning §§22–34. Failure to decide the request for an additional period and the arbitration first objection. Ministry of Justice, UYAP Legislation and Case Law.

[6] Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu), 20 April 2016, E.2014/695, K.2016/522. Request by a defendant who did not respond and did not submit evidence on time for a period to submit evidence later; majority reasoning and dissenting views. Ministry of Justice, UYAP Legislation and Case Law.

[7] Akil, Cenk, "Cevap Dilekçesi Vermeyen Davalının Delil İleri Sürüp Süremeyeceği Meselesi" ("Whether a Defendant Who Does Not File a Response Petition May Submit Evidence"), Journal of the Turkish Justice Academy, 2021, No. 48, pp. 1–20; in particular pp. 3–10 and 15–16. DOI: 10.54049/taad.1009162. Article and full text.

[8] Ministry of Justice, UYAP Citizen Portal (UYAP Vatandaş Portalı) and UYAP Citizen Portal Frequently Asked Questions (UYAP Vatandaş Portal Sıkça Sorulan Sorular), in particular p. 1, questions 3–4; distinction between file tracking, system login and electronic submission of documents. UYAP Citizen Portal; official usage guidance.

[9] Attorneyship Law No. 1136 (Avukatlık Kanunu), Articles 176–181; bar association legal aid. Mevzuat Information System.

[10] Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes (Hukuk Uyuşmazlıklarında Arabuluculuk Kanunu), in particular Articles 15/5 and 18. Mevzuat Information System.

[11] Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 (Türk Ticaret Kanunu), in particular Articles 1446 and 1475–1476; notification and conduct of the defense under liability insurance. Mevzuat Information System, consolidated text.