Attorney Conflict of Interest and the Ban on Representing Conflicting Interests

Can an attorney represent both sides? Can an attorney take on a case against a former client? What happens to the action, the attorney's fee and the client's rights when a conflict of interest arises? The answers depend first on the nature of the work undertaken, the relationship between the defenses and the information the attorney has received, rather than on the number of parties.

An attorney may not provide legal assistance in the same matter to persons whose interests are opposed. The prohibition is not limited to representation in court; advice and legal opinions may also fall within its scope. On the other hand, representing several persons together is not prohibited in every case. The decisive question is whether protecting one person's rights weakens the defense or the legal position of the other. Where a breach is found, disciplinary, fee, damages, criminal and procedural consequences are assessed separately; one consequence does not automatically produce all the others. [1] [2] [3]

What is an attorney's conflict of interest?

A conflict of interest is the situation in which the loyalty and duty of care an attorney owes to one person cannot be reconciled with obligations owed to another person, with the attorney's own economic interest, or with obligations arising from a previous professional relationship. The problem is not only the attorney actually changing sides. Failing to rely on evidence that would benefit one client because it would harm another client also weakens a defense. For this reason, the assessment cannot be reduced to whether the case was won or lost. [1, Arts. 34 and 38] [2, rules 35–37]

An attorney sitting at the same table as the opposing party, proposing a settlement, or explaining the weak points of a case to the client does not, by itself, create a conflict. Sound legal assistance sometimes requires limiting the client's expectations. Yet a different problem arises where the attorney, because of an obligation owed to another person, cannot say what the client needs to hear, cannot use a legal option the client needs, or moves during the meeting into advising the other side.

How are independence, impartiality and confidentiality distinguished?

The attorney for a party is not the impartial decision-maker in the dispute. The attorney independently defends the lawful interests of the client. Equating the role of the attorney with that of the judge or the mediator blurs the purpose of the representation. The attorney's independence requires that the attorney does not lose professional judgment under pressure from the client, the opposing party, a third party who pays the fee, or the attorney's own economic expectations. [1, Arts. 1–2 and 34]

The duty of confidentiality protects information obtained in the course of legal assistance. It is connected to the ban on conflicts but is not identical to it. Even where no confidential information has been disclosed, representing opposing interests together may be prohibited. The duty of confidentiality may continue after the representation has ended. Nor can it be concluded from this that a previous relationship prohibits every new matter indefinitely: the connection of the new matter, the opposing interest and the risk of misuse of confidential information must be made concrete. [1, Arts. 36 and 38] [2, rule 37]

Whom does the ban protect?

At the centre of the ban lie the client's trust and effective legal assistance. The reliability of the defense and the sound functioning of the administration of justice are also protected. The Attorneyship Law defines the profession as a public service and a liberal profession, and sets out the purpose of the profession in Article 2. The public character of the service does not require that every professional breach attract the same sanction or that all of the client's acts be treated as void. [1]

Nejat Aday's work makes a strong contribution precisely at this point: a measured relationship should be established between the purpose of the ban and the consequence of a breach. Subjecting the attorney to a sanction and rendering the case of the client, who must be protected, impossible to pursue are not the same thing. The public side of the profession, contractual loyalty, the power of representation and the guarantees of judicial proceedings should be considered together. This approach underlies the distinctions made in the rest of this article. [3]

Legal bases of the ban on representation

The text of Article 38(1)(b) of the Attorneyship Law reads: "If the attorney has acted for, or given an opinion to, a party whose interests are opposed in the same matter", the attorney must decline the proposed work. The final paragraph of the article regulates this obligation for the attorney's partners and for the attorneys employed by the attorney. It is important that a legal opinion has been given; it is not required in every case that an action has already been filed or a power of attorney submitted to the court. [1, Art. 38]

Articles 35 and 36 of the Professional Rules of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations (TBB) address, respectively, the representation of two persons whose defenses may harm each other in the same case, and assistance to the opposing party of a person who has been given legal help in a dispute. Attorneys working in a shared office are also covered by the obligation in Article 36. In criminal proceedings, Article 152 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271 (CMK) makes joint defense conditional on the suspects' or accused persons' interests being compatible with one another. [2] [7]

The joint application of these provisions does not mean that all consequences are subject to the same standard. Conduct that undermines professional trust may be significant for discipline even where damage has not been proved. For damages, damage and causation must be shown; for criminal liability, the statutory elements of the offence must also be established. [1] [3] [5] [8]

How is "the same matter" determined? A file number is not enough

"The same matter" does not mean only a case bearing the same case number. An action for a debt arising from a contract, a claim for damages brought against it, and the criminal investigation of the same event may be heard in separate files. If the roles the attorney has undertaken in these proceedings affect one another, separating the files does not resolve the conflict. Conversely, the fact that the same property, or the name of the same person or company, appears in two files does not automatically create a prohibition. [3] [4]

Three connections should be identified in particular in the review. The factual connection shows whether the two matters arise from the same transaction or from events that affect one another. The interest connection shows how a claim in one file affects the legal position of the other represented person. The information connection concerns whether the statements learned during the earlier assistance may be used in the new matter. These are not tests set out verbatim in a statutory article; they are review questions that structure a concrete assessment.

Why can representation in different files still be problematic?

In the decision of the TBB Disciplinary Board of 1 June 2007, E. 2007/113, K. 2007/175, the importance of the relationship between separate actions and of using information from an earlier file is evident. The connection in which a position acquired in the first matter was later used against the former client showed that the defense "the files are different" was not sufficient on its own. The reprimand was affirmed. For the reader, the consequence is to compare not only the powers of attorney but also the allegations and documents carried from one file to another. [10]

In the decision of the TBB Disciplinary Board of 11 July 2025, E. 2025/396, K. 2025/483, an attorney who had acted for a person as creditor in one file acted as attorney for a bank in other enforcement proceedings against the same person. The proceedings were linked by an attachment. The explanation that the files had been handled within the office by another person did not remove responsibility in light of the professional acts that were established. This decision also shows that organization within an office cannot replace professional control. [14]

Does the same property always create a conflict of interest?

In the decision of the TBB Disciplinary Board of 6 May 2021, E. 2021/277, K. 2021/333, despite work connected with the same property, the parties and the rights in dispute were assessed; it was accepted that a concrete conflict of interest had not been proved, and the decision not to impose a penalty was affirmed. This counter-example is important: a professional prohibition cannot be turned into an unlimited bar on taking work based only on similarity of subject matter. [13]

An applicant should not be satisfied with stating that "this attorney knows me." The applicant should show what work they obtained assistance in, how the new dispute is connected to that work, and at what point their defense could be harmed. The attorney's defense also should not be limited to the statement that the matters are in "different courts"; it should be made by reference to the scope of the work and the nature of the information.

Current, former and prospective clients who have not yet signed an engagement

Taking on new work against a current client

During an ongoing legal assistance relationship, undertaking another matter against the client raises, alongside the question of the same matter, the duties of loyalty and trust. The statement "the new file has nothing to do with the old engagement" does not in every case justify taking a position against a person who is currently represented. The scope of the continuing advice, the ongoing matters and the client's legitimate expectations must also be examined. [1, Art. 34] [2]

The TBB Disciplinary Board's decision of 7 February 2014, E. 2013/102, K. 2014/67 illustrates this distinction. While the representation relationship with a client continued, involvement in protection and divorce proceedings in favour of the client's spouse was held incompatible with professional duties, and a reprimand was imposed. The importance of the decision is that different legal matters do not, by themselves, remove an ongoing relationship of trust. [12]

Can an attorney take on a case against a former client?

Being a former client does not create a lifelong and universal bar on representation for the attorney. However, the subject of the earlier legal assistance, the connection with the new work and the duty of confidentiality remain protected. In particular, if financial circumstances, the limit of a settlement or a defense strategy learned in the earlier file would benefit the opposing party in the new case, there is a serious problem. The termination of a power of attorney does not mean that the information obtained has been forgotten. [1] [2] [3]

Hypothetical example: The attorney who represented one spouse in a divorce file and who, years later, pursues a labour claim against an unrelated third party of the other spouse is not in the same position as one who takes on a property dispute against the former client. In the second case, the financial information of the earlier file may be significant. In the first case too, the parties' names alone should not be decisive; the connection and the use of confidential information must be examined. The example does not produce a fixed answer of permission or prohibition for every concrete case.

Do the initial meeting and advice also create protection?

The absence of a power of attorney does not mean that information disclosed in discussion may be freely used. TBB Professional Rules Art. 37 treats information obtained from a person whose case has not been taken on as covered by professional secrecy. If a legal opinion was given, a separate assessment under Article 38 of the Attorneyship Law is required. The absence of a fee does not, by itself, remove the existence of the assistance. [1] [2]

On the other hand, the fact that every unsolicited email sent to the office does not automatically make all attorneys barred from acting against all opposing parties. The content of the conversation, whether legal assistance was actually given, what confidential information was obtained and the nature of the approach are examined. Repeated approaches made merely to prevent the opposing party from choosing an attorney should be assessed separately for good faith and for the concrete relationship. Abuse of such an approach does not authorize disclosure of confidential information that was genuinely obtained. [3]

Acceptance of a matter should not be reduced to a signed engagement or to the moment of payment. The conduct of the parties and the provisions on the undertaking of work to be done in a professional capacity under Article 503 of the Turkish Code of Obligations may be relevant. For this reason, the office should first perform a check on the parties and the subject matter, and should state promptly whether it accepts or declines the matter, without collecting unnecessarily detailed documents. [1, Art. 37] [5, Art. 503]

When can an attorney represent several persons, and when can they not?

The existence of several clients is not, by itself, a conflict of interest. Claims and defenses may run in the same direction. However, whether the initial alignment is maintained during the course of the matter must be monitored. The sharing of a settlement amount, limited prospects of recovery, one person shifting responsibility onto another, or the withholding of information between them may create an opposition that was not foreseen at the outset. [2, rule 35] [3]

Can one attorney defend two accused persons in a criminal case?

The condition in Article 152 CMK is that the interests of the suspects or accused persons be compatible with one another. Being tried for the same offence does not make joint defense mandatory, and being in the same file does not by itself create a prohibition. If the defense of one accused requires arguing that the other accused committed the act, the limit of joint defense has been crossed. The statements accusing each other, the way responsibility is shared and the different defense options must be examined together. [7]

Court of Cassation Criminal General Assembly, 23 February 2021, E. 2018/19, K. 2021/53: The statements accusing each other and the defense conducted by the joint defense counsel were assessed. The Court accepted that a judgment given without the defense being provided by separate counsel was an irregularity limiting the right of defense. The Chief Public Prosecutor's objection was upheld, the affirmance was set aside and the conviction was quashed without the other aspects being examined. The practical lesson of the decision is that joint defense must be controlled not merely by checking names, but by reference to the defense each accused can actually use. [15]

The fact that the accused say "we want the same attorney" does not remove a conflict that prevents effective defense. Nor does an accused's later retraction of an earlier incriminating statement by itself remove the problem. Where an appointed defense counsel exists, the solution is not merely to notify the court that the attorney has left the file; the situation must be explained to the court and the appointing unit so that a new defense can be properly established. [2] [7] [15]

Divorce, maintenance and family disputes

In an agreed divorce, the parties' agreement on the divorce does not render their interests identical in respect of maintenance, compensation, property and arrangements concerning the child. An attorney who prepares the protocol as the representative of one spouse is in a different position from one who says they are assuming the interests of both spouses. If the opposing party accepts a proposal without an attorney, that does not make the same attorney the client of that party. The person represented must be clear. [1] [2]

For details, see the article on title cancellation and re-registration based on a divorce protocol. The needs of a common child should also not be equated merely because one of the parents asks for it. It cannot be assumed in every case that there is a conflict between child and parent; what matters is on whose behalf which right is exercised and how the claims affect each other. For example, the adult child's claim for support and a parent's separate maintenance claim may appear to point in the same direction at the outset; limited ability to pay and the effect of the claims on each other may change the analysis. The adult child's right cannot be assumed to be included within the parent's representation. [3]

In these files, the safe practice is to avoid assuming that persons "have come as a family," and to record each person's claim and the representation relationship separately. For the scope of services in family law, the divorce and family disputes page may also be consulted; the limits of the representation ban are, however, protected in every file.

Companies, cooperatives, managers and partners

Being the attorney of a company or a cooperative is not the same as being the personal attorney of its managers and partners. A manager may give instructions or pay the fee; however, where the interests of the legal entity clash with the personal defense of the manager, the identity of the client is decisive. Belonging to the same economic group alone does not mean that every company is automatically treated as the same client; the contract and the factual assistance relationship must be examined. [1] [3]

In the TBB Disciplinary Board's decision of 2 January 2013, E. 2012/551, K. 2013/86, an attorney who provided legal assistance to a cooperative was found to have acted in the defense of managers prosecuted for offences allegedly committed against the cooperative. The explanations that the matters were of different kinds and that permission existed were not accepted as sufficient, and a reprimand was affirmed. The lesson of this decision is that the instruction of a person representing the institution does not remove the conflict between the institution and its manager. [11]

Joint creditors, heirs and settlement negotiations

Representation of two persons who are creditors of the same debtor together may appear possible. However, if the debtor's assets are not enough to satisfy both, interests may diverge concerning priority, security, settlement reductions and the sharing of recovery. The fact that heirs act together to protect the estate does not mean that everyone has the same interest at the stage of distribution. In such examples, it should be explained whether the risk is abstract or a real opposition that affects the decisions of representation. [3]

Speaking with the opposing party during settlement negotiations is natural. Under Article 31 of the TBB Professional Rules, communication with a represented opposing party is in principle conducted through that party's attorney; in necessary discussions with an unrepresented opposing party, it is important that the client is informed. Conducting negotiations should not be confused with providing separate legal advice to the opposing party. [2]

Does the consent of the parties remove the ban on representation?

Under Turkish law, a mandatory duty to refuse work imposed by law cannot be removed by a general consent document. Statements such as "both sides agreed," "they said no harm would occur," or "they are paying the fee together" do not eliminate a real conflict of interest. Article 38 of the Attorneyship Law does not provide a general exception allowing the parties to give permission. The TBB decision on the cooperative and its managers also gives concrete form to the limit of consent. [1] [11]

It is nonetheless different for a conflict that has genuinely disappeared subsequently to a conflict for which permission to act is obtained despite its existence. The scope of the claims may have changed, no opposing interest may remain, or the client relationship initially wrongly identified may have been clarified. In such a case, the changed facts are examined. Placing a written consent in the file alone is not enough. The problem of protecting confidential information learned in advance may also continue separately. [3]

Mediation and acting as party counsel must not be confused

A mediator is a separate professional role conducting a joint search for a solution for the parties. An attorney who previously mediated the dispute cannot act as counsel for one of the parties in a case concerning that dispute; this is separately provided for in Article 9(4) of the Law on Mediation in Civil Disputes No. 6325. The current Attorneyship Law No. 1136 also includes a disciplinary provision, in Article 135, concerning the later practice of law in a matter where the attorney has acted as mediator, conciliator, expert or in another designated official capacity. [9] [1]

Accordingly, the claim that "I am reconciling the two sides" cannot justify taking on the representation of two opposing parties at the same time. Party representation, mediation and negotiation on behalf of only one party must be defined separately.

Shared offices, employed attorneys and changes of office

Conflict checks cannot be confined to the attorney who signs the file. The final paragraph of Article 38 of the Attorneyship Law concerns partners and employed attorneys; Article 36 of the TBB Professional Rules is important for shared offices. Distributing the files of opposing parties to different attorneys in the same office does not make the common information or address irrelevant. Access to information, acceptance of work and professional supervision must be assessed together. [1] [2]

Electronic files must be separated, access rights must be restricted, and the duty of confidentiality must be explained to employees. However, these measures cannot be presented as a "information wall" exception that automatically removes the statutory representation ban under Turkish law. Under Article 37 of the TBB Professional Rules, confidentiality measures are also required for assistants, trainees and employees. [2]

Where an attorney moves to another office, it is neither accurate to assume an unlimited and lifelong ban for all of the files of the previous office, nor to regard previous information as unimportant on the ground that the attorney is "now at another office." It must be determined in what matter the attorney worked, whose information they had access to, how the new file is connected, and which professional duties still continue. The author favours a strict approach to attorneys who leave a former joint office and take on work against that office's clients; the author stresses that having worked in a large office does not by itself justify a defense of ignorance of a conflict. This view shows the importance of not treating a change of office as release from obligations. The concrete scope of the ban, however, must be determined by clearly establishing the statutory relationship and the connection between the files. [3]

Hiring a non-attorney employee from another office cannot be automatically equated with the statutory provision on joint or employed attorneys. On the other hand, hiring an employee solely to gain access to the opposing party's confidential information is different. As the author also indicates, the employee's earlier function and access to files must be investigated. A change of personnel does not remove the duty of confidentiality. [2] [3]

Where international office networks are involved, the conflict rules of different countries may also apply. This does not mean that the mandatory rules in Türkiye are removed. For foreign law partnerships, the special framework in Article 44 of the Attorneyship Law must also be observed. Using confidential information to attract clients away from another office, or taking unfair advantage of a colleague's work in bad faith, raises separate issues of care and professional rules. [1] [2] [3]

When does the attorney's own economic interest become significant?

The attorney's earning of a fee is a normal element of the representation relationship and is not, by itself, a prohibited conflict of interest. Pursuing the attorney's fee claim through legal channels also does not automatically mean that the attorney is acting for the opposing party of a former client. However, the information usable in a fee dispute, the limits of the duty of confidentiality and the course to be followed must be assessed separately. The right to a fee does not authorize disclosure of unnecessary personal or financial information. [1] [3]

A different problem arises where the attorney's personal investment, company connection or benefit from a third party affects the advice given to the client. Where the client is directed to an unfavorable settlement merely because the attorney wishes to collect the fee quickly, professional judgment is compromised. In a concrete case, the legal reasoning for the advice must be separated from the attorney's independent interest.

Article 47 of the Attorneyship Law separately regulates the prohibition on acquiring contested rights. The prohibition lasts one year from the end of the matter and applies to partners and to attorneys employed by the attorney; the provision in Article 164 is reserved. This special provision should not be extended into an unlimited rule prohibiting all fee agreements or every economic relationship. [1, Arts. 47 and 164]

What should be done when a conflict is identified?

The first step is to check the parties and the subject matter before accepting the new work. If the conflict appears later, it must be determined which files are affected and whether any delay in the procedures would cause loss of rights. The client should be informed, without disclosing another client's confidence, to the extent necessary to understand why the representation cannot continue. Continuing ordinary procedures while concealing the situation is not a solution. [1] [2]

In each case, withdrawing from one of the files may not be sufficient. If the attorney has learned information from both persons that could be used against the other, continuing the representation for the person who remains may also create a problem. The independent establishment of new representation, the proper transfer of documents, notification of approaching time limits and the necessary disclosures to the relevant authorities must be considered together. [3]

Withdrawal, dismissal and notice periods

Under Article 41 of the Attorneyship Law, the power of an attorney who withdraws at their own request continues for fifteen days from the notification of the situation to the client. In civil proceedings, Article 82 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the authority of an attorney who resigns continues for two weeks from the notification of the resignation to the client. These two texts should not be treated as if they set the same period; the proceedings and the applicable procedure must be distinguished. Proof that the notification was made is needed to establish the start of the period. [1] [6]

These transitional provisions cannot be used as permission to continue a conflicted representation in the ordinary way. Transitional steps should be planned that prevent loss of rights and that do not breach confidentiality or the ban. Under Article 81 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the notices necessary for dismissal or resignation to take effect as regards the court and the opposing party must also be given. The client's engagement of a new attorney, an application to the bar, or the issue of a dismissal document does not in itself suspend other time limits in the file. [6]

For attorneys appointed by the bar, the assessment by the competent authority of an unavoidable reason or a valid excuse is important. In particular, in a criminal file, merely saying "I have withdrawn" without a new defense counsel being provided may not protect the defense. Notices and new appointments must therefore be carried out together with the competent authorities. [1, Art. 41] [7]

Disciplinary liability: why does the 2025 amendment matter?

Law No. 7571, published on 25 December 2025, amended the disciplinary provisions of the Attorneyship Law. Under the current Attorneyship Law, Article 135(2)(f) lists the breach of the mandatory duty to refuse work among the conduct that requires a reprimand. For this reason, general lists of sanctions in earlier publications, or the penalty imposed in an old decision, cannot be carried over as the outcome of every current case. The date of the act, the provisions applicable and the concrete conduct must be assessed together. [19] [1]

A reprimand is neither fixed nor the only possible result in every case. Where the attorney, or another person, obtains a benefit for themselves at the expense of the client through neglect or abuse of the duties, the separate provision in Article 135(3)(a) may be engaged. Where the same work as a prior official or mediation role is practised, a separate provision in Article 135(4)(c) applies. Additional conduct such as disclosing secrets is examined under its own provisions. [1]

Previous final criminal sanctions, the five-year period and the circumstances in which a lighter penalty may be applied under Article 136 of the Attorneyship Law may affect the sanction. A single definitive statement such as "the penalty for a conflict of interest is this" is therefore incomplete. The disciplinary decisions from 2007 to 2025 reviewed above are particularly examples of how a conflict is identified; their penalties must be read within the law of the period in which they were given. [1] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14]

Complaints to the bar and disciplinary time limits

A complaint must clearly state the attorney's identity, the subject of the legal assistance, the conflicting matter, the dates of the events and the documents available. The application is addressed to the bar with which the attorney is registered. A disciplinary investigation does not perform the same function as a civil action that decides on the refund of a fee or damages for loss. Different legal routes for the same event may need to be pursued separately. [1, Art. 139 et seq.]

The basic distinction in Article 159 of the Attorneyship Law is as follows: if three years have passed from the act, disciplinary prosecution cannot be brought; the taking over of the file by the management board affects the running of this period. If four and a half years have passed from the act, a disciplinary penalty cannot be imposed. Where the conduct is also an offence subject to a longer limitation period, the special regime is taken into account. These periods should not be confused with the periods applicable to the client's damages claim. [1]

The provisions added in 2025 also affect the calculation. Where a decision has been taken to await the outcome of criminal prosecution, a one-year rule runs from the notification to the bar of the final court decision; suspension in the event of an action against the disciplinary measure, and a further two-year limit for a new decision after the annulment decision reaches the bar or the TBB, are also separately assessed. For this reason, a definitive conclusion should not be reached merely by adding a fixed number of years to the date of the act. [1, Art. 159] [19]

Dismissal, attorney's fee and damages

Can a conflict of interest be a justified ground for dismissal?

A concrete conflict of interest may, by undermining trust and the duty of loyalty between the attorney and the client, form the basis of an assessment of justified dismissal. However, suspicion alone, or dissatisfaction felt later, does not in every case produce a justified dismissal. The facts relied on by the client, the attorney's explanation and the scope of the work being carried out are assessed together. The dismissal notice should show the reason and dates clearly; this matters for any future dispute. [1, Art. 174] [3]

Article 174 of the Attorneyship Law provides that, as a rule, on dismissal the whole of the fee is to be paid; where the attorney is dismissed because of their fault or negligence, payment of the fee need not be made. The same article also provides that an attorney who leaves the work without a justified reason cannot claim a fee and must repay a fee paid in advance. Nevertheless, assessing the fee for several items completed on different dates by reference to a single total may be misleading. What was completed and when, the scope of the dismissal and which service is affected by the alleged fault must be separated. [1]

Nejat Aday's account of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) decision of 23 April 2009, IX ZR 167/07, offers a comparative discussion of the value of the service before the breach and of the loss of fee. The decision is cited here as relayed by Aday. The German solution cannot replace Article 174 of Türkiye's law; its contribution is to help think about the fee outcome in terms of the whole work and its stages. [3]

What must be proved to obtain damages?

A damages claim is not complete merely by stating that disciplinary misconduct exists. A breach of contract, damage and an appropriate causal link between the conduct and the damage must be shown. Under Article 112 TBK, the debtor may be held liable for the damage arising unless they prove that no fault can be attributed to them; Article 506 TBK governs the attorney's duty of loyalty and care. [5]

Hypothetical example: Where it is alleged that, because of the conflict, a defense was not raised in time and an additional expense arose as a result, the questions to be answered are: what step should have been taken, why was it not taken, and how did the expense arise? That the main action was lost does not by itself mean the whole loss is placed on the attorney. It is discussed whether, had legal assistance been properly provided, the outcome would have been different, by reference to the evidence in the file and the procedural possibilities.

The attorney's strong defense may be that there was no conflict, that the information was not connected with the relevant work, that the alleged damage arose from another cause, or that the client's own conduct affected the outcome. Assessing these objections neither trivialises the professional breach nor removes the burden of proving damage. Where insurance exists, its scope and exclusions should be checked against the policy; a professional liability insurance policy does not guarantee payment for every conduct.

The special time limit for damages claims

Article 40 of the Attorneyship Law should not be overlooked. For compensation claims brought by the client on the basis of the contract against the attorney, the law provides for one year from the date the existence of the right is learned and, in any event, five years from the event giving rise to the damage. The starting date, the contractual nature of the claim and any other applicable provisions are determined on the concrete file. Using a period applicable to a general power of attorney relationship without examining this special provision may produce an incorrect result. [1]

A complaint to the bar about the attorney does not mean that the period for a damages claim has been protected. Forfeiture or prescription arguments, the grounds for suspension and interruption, and the legal nature of the claim must be examined separately. The information on which the time limit depends, the notices and the damage documents must be organised from the beginning.

Does criminal liability arise automatically?

Not every conflict of interest is automatically a crime. Disciplinary law assesses professional conduct under its own rules. Under criminal law, however, the statutory elements of the particular offence, the mental element and other relevant conditions must be present. For the offence of abuse of office under Article 257 of the Turkish Penal Code, the statutory conditions — such as victimisation, public loss or unjust gain, in addition to the breach of the duties of office — must be specified. Where another offence is alleged, its elements must be examined separately. [8]

Merely failing to make an application within a time limit through negligence does not by itself prove a conflict of interest. Such conduct may breach the duty of care; but in order to speak of a conflict, a connection with an opposing interest or another professional obligation must be shown separately. [3]

The special rules and decisions under the former Law No. 765 should not be presented as though they existed unchanged within the current Turkish Penal Code. The historical assessment in Aday's work — Roman law, German criminal and professional law development, and earlier Turkish criminal provisions — explains the history of the prohibition; it does not form the direct basis of present-day punishment. The distinction between negligently breaching a professional rule and carrying out the elements of an offence that can be committed intentionally must be preserved. [3]

Offences committed by attorneys in the course of, or because of, their duties may also engage the special procedure in Articles 58–59 of the Attorneyship Law. A refusal to grant investigation permission in the criminal process and a finding that the conduct is appropriate for disciplinary purposes are not the same outcome. The Turkish Bar Association's decision of 11 July 2025 also reflects this distinction. [1] [14]

Do the contract and the procedural acts become invalid?

The attorney's engagement agreement is distinct from the power of representation

The attorney's engagement agreement governs the relationship of service, loyalty and fees between the attorney and the client. The power of attorney and the authority to represent concern acts performed before third parties or the court. The assumption that a violation in one relationship automatically renders all other acts void may particularly harm a client who was unaware of the breach. [3] [5, Art. 42] [6, Art. 72]

A subsequent acceptance of a conflicting matter does not automatically retrospectively invalidate an earlier engagement that was lawfully concluded. The invalidity of the later agreement under the mandatory prohibition, and its consequences under Article 27 TBK, are discussed separately. Aday distinguishes between preventing the prohibited conduct and removing all the effects of the agreement; he proposes an assessment that protects the client and is consistent with the purpose. This is a doctrinal view, and it cannot be presented as a definitive validity conclusion for every concrete dispute. [3] [5]

Aday also distinguishes between a second client who was unaware of the conflict and one who entered into the agreement knowingly, and with the aim of using it against the earlier client. In the first case, he argues for regard to the protection that contractual liability offers as to proof and time limits; in the second case, for consideration of absolute invalidity and, where its conditions are met, liability for damage caused by an immoral act. This last possibility may be debated under the current Article 49(2) TBK; the second client's knowledge or bad faith should not be presumed without proof. [3] [5]

That a contract is treated as valid does not mean that the attorney may be compelled to continue the prohibited representation. Demanding performance of conduct that is forbidden is one matter; discussing the consequences for fees, refund and damages is another. The purpose of protecting the earlier client does not require that a later client acting in good faith be left entirely unprotected. [3]

Does the action lapse or do all procedural acts become void?

No general consequence of that kind can be drawn. First the type of proceedings, the nature of the breach of representation and the procedural acts affected must be determined. In a civil action, the court must clarify the status of the representation in a way that removes the conflict; holding the attorney disciplinarily responsible should not become a reason to remove the client's access to the case unnecessarily. In a criminal file, where joint defense has weakened the defense, a reversal may result, as in the Criminal General Assembly decision above. [3] [6] [15]

Where a person who is not a lawyer undertakes professional representation, that must be considered separately. The professional conflict discussed by Aday is not the same legal problem as the representation of a non-lawyer or the loss of authority to practise the profession. The distinction must be preserved when examining the validity of the representation. [3]

Article 77 of the Code of Civil Procedure deals with the absence of a power of attorney. Using that provision to remedy a gap in representation is not a general rule written in law that "ratification cures a conflict of interest." The client's acceptance of the acts performed cannot be used as an unlimited permission that retroactively removes an imperative professional prohibition. [3] [6]

Judgment of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) of 14 May 2009, IX ZR 60/08, is an example of distinguishing between breach of the professional prohibition on representation and the validity of procedural representation authority. By ruling that a breach of the prohibition does not automatically invalidate the procedural authority, the court set aside the judgment under appeal, leaving open the question of the validity of the lawyer's engagement agreement. The value of the comparison lies in this distinction. It is neither a provision directly applicable to Turkish law nor a summary of all of German law. [16]

Can a final judgment be reopened?

The later discovery of a conflict of interest does not make a final civil judgment reviewable of its own accord. The grounds for reopening proceedings are limited by Article 375 of the Code of Civil Procedure. For example, where fraud that affected the judgment is alleged, the conditions of the relevant sub-paragraph must actually exist and be proved. Representation by a conflicted attorney should not automatically be treated as the same event either. [3] [6]

Where the decision has not become final, the available remedy and the stage of the file are assessed. Under Article 371 of the Code of Civil Procedure, whether a procedural irregularity is a ground for quashing is also examined on its own conditions. The imposition of a disciplinary penalty does not of itself annul the court's decision, and the annulment of the court's decision does not of itself fix the amount of damages. Distinguishing the routes of challenge is necessary in order to pursue the correct claim before the correct authority.

What does comparative law show?

In England and Wales, the conflict guidance of the Solicitors Regulation Authority addresses separately the attorney's conflict with their own interest and conflicts between clients. The limited exceptions for particular situations between clients are subject to conditions such as informed written consent, necessary safeguards and the reasonableness of the representation. These exceptions cannot be carried over into Turkish law automatically. The guidance is useful here for its systematic checking before accepting work and for monitoring the risk throughout the process. [17]

The American Bar Association's Model Rule 1.7 commentary separates direct opposition from risks that significantly limit the attorney's representation. Consent is not regarded as sufficient for the representation of parties opposed to each other in the same litigation; in other situations, different conditions are discussed. These are not a single statute in force in the same way in all United States jurisdictions. A conduct not permitted under Turkish law does not become lawful merely because, in a foreign model, it is possible under specific conditions. [18]

The practical lesson from the comparison is to record at the outset the client's identity, the scope of the work, previous relationships and access to information. These records are not kept merely to protect the firm: they allow the client to understand from whom, on what matter and to what extent they have obtained independent legal assistance.

Document and application roadmap for the client

Where there is doubt about a conflict of interest, the time limits in the ongoing action must first be protected. The representation relationship and the opposing work should then be documented; if necessary, an assessment by an independent other attorney should be obtained. The petition must state its purpose clearly: correcting the current representation, requesting a disciplinary review, resolving a fee dispute or claiming damages are not the same step.

Documents must be obtained by lawful means and preserved. Accessing another person's account without permission, making secret recordings, or unnecessarily disseminating personal data may expose the claimant to a fresh unlawful act. Rather than making public accusations, presenting the necessary information to the competent authority within a proportionate scope helps the dispute to be examined properly.

Which route can achieve which outcome?

Where fee and damages claims are involved, the competent court, jurisdiction and conditions for proceeding must be determined according to the nature of the service, the status of the parties and the legal basis of the claim. The applicability of mandatory mediation under consumer or commercial transaction rules must also be checked in the concrete file. There is no single court or single condition precedent for all attorney disputes. Court fees, expert fees and the risk of an award of attorney's fees against the claimant are also calculated from the claim and the process; a complaint to the bar does not replace this financial assessment.

Conflict checks applicable in a law firm

At the acceptance of work, the firm must record, alongside the names of the parties, company connections, former titles, representatives and the real subject of the dispute. The sharing of a surname alone is no obstacle, and different trade names likewise do not guarantee that the relationships are independent. A preliminary screen using the minimum necessary information reduces the acquisition of unnecessary confidential information before work is accepted.

Checking is not carried out only when a file is opened. The joining of a new party, a counterclaim, the arrival of a new attorney at the office, a merger of companies, one client accusing another, or the divergence of settlement conditions are grounds for new review. When a match is found, it must be recorded who decided, on what information and on what grounds. Automatic name screening helps; it does not replace legal assessment.

The record of a refused matter must also be kept confidential. Not everyone in the office needs unrestricted access to all former application documents. Appropriate access authorisations, the file-handover record and confidentiality statements given to employees complete the conflict check. When explaining the grounds for refusal, one should avoid unnecessarily disclosing the existence or confidential information of another client. These measures do not remove the statutory representation ban; they help prevent a breach. [1] [2]

Conclusion

An attorney's conflict of interest is the question of whether legal assistance can be provided loyally and independently to whom. A file number, the consent of the parties or the division of duties within an office does not on their own determine the answer. The division of the same event into different lawsuits may not remove the conflict; nor does the fact that the same property appears in two matters create a prohibition automatically. A concrete opposition of interests and the effect of the information acquired must be shown together.

A sound solution meets two needs together: the prohibited representation must be ended, and the defense and rights of the client must be protected. The attorney's disciplinary liability, fee claim, compensation for loss, criminal liability and the validity of procedural acts are therefore assessed separately. One route does not replace another; no step should be postponed on the assumption that time limits stop of their own accord.

From the client's point of view, the most useful step is to turn suspicion into concrete documents and to protect the rights in the ongoing file. From the attorney's point of view, professional care requires investigating the conflict at the outset, monitoring changed circumstances as they arise, and being able to withdraw from legal assistance lawfully and properly where necessary. Trust is protected not only by the promise given when taking on the work, but also by timely refusal of work that should not be undertaken.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can an attorney represent two people in the same case?

Persons whose interests and defenses are compatible may be represented together. If one person's defense harms the other, joint representation is not appropriate. In criminal files, the common-interest condition of Article 152 CMK also applies. For details, see the section on joint representation.

Can the same attorney act for both the claimant and the respondent?

In the same dispute, joint representation of parties whose interests are opposed falls within the prohibition. The consent of the parties does not remove this mandatory limit. Holding a settlement negotiation with the opposing party is not the same as representing that party as a client. See consent and the ban on representation.

Can my former attorney take a case against me?

The subject of the earlier assistance, its connection with the new work, the continuing duties of loyalty and the duty of confidentiality must be examined. Former clientship does not create a lifelong prohibition on every matter; however, opposing representation in the same or a connected matter, and the use of earlier information, may create a serious obstacle. See former client.

Can the attorney I only consulted take on the opposing party's case?

Where a legal opinion has genuinely been given, the ban on representation applies; even if no case was taken on, the duty of confidentiality is engaged with respect to information learned. Each general contact or unsolicited message does not automatically produce the same result. The content of the meeting is decisive. See the first meeting.

Can two separate attorneys in the same office represent opposing parties?

Assigning separate signatories or file officers is not sufficient. Articles 38 of the Attorneyship Law and 36 of the TBB Professional Rules require assessment as regards partners, employed attorneys and the shared office. Separation of technical access does not automatically remove the statutory prohibition. See shared office.

If there is a conflict of interest, can I recover the whole attorney's fee?

The fee outcome is not determined automatically. Justified dismissal, fault, the stage the work had reached, the contract and the payments made are examined under Article 174 of the Attorneyship Law. Where there are several matters, the status of each must be separated. See fee and damages.

Does a complaint to the bar stop the case or the time limits?

A complaint to the bar does not automatically stop the ongoing action, the time limit for appeal or the time limit for a damages claim. Each step required for each right must be taken separately. A disciplinary application is not an action that gives a decision on damages. See routes of application.

What is the time limit for a contractual damages claim against an attorney?

Article 40 of the Attorneyship Law provides for one year from the date the claim was learned and five years from the event causing the damage. The nature of the claim and the factors affecting the start and duration of the period must be assessed on the file. See special time limit.

What is the disciplinary penalty for a conflict of interest?

Article 135(2)(f) of the current Attorneyship Law provides for the breach of the mandatory refusal of work within the scope of a reprimand. However, the date of the act, additional conduct and the conditions of application in Article 136 may change the outcome. An old decision's penalty is not accepted as the same for every current event. See disciplinary liability.

Does the action become invalid automatically because of a conflict of interest?

No. The nature of the representation problem, the type of proceedings and the act affected are examined. Joint defense that has weakened the defense may be a ground for reversal; no automatic conclusion of invalidity can be drawn for all acts. Final decisions require separate statutory grounds for reopening. See contract and procedure.

Can the attorney leave only one client when a conflict is identified?

Not always. Confidential information about both persons or continuing obligations may also prevent the continuation of the remaining representation. Withdrawal, notice and the establishment of new legal assistance must be planned together. See what to do when a conflict is identified.

Is a conflict of interest also a crime?

Not every disciplinary breach is a crime. The statutory and mental elements of the relevant offence must also be present. An allegation of abuse of office or of another offence is not proved merely because a professional rule has been said to be breached. See criminal liability.

Sources

[1] Attorneyship Law No. 1136 (Avukatlık Kanunu), in particular Arts. 1–2, 34, 36–41, 44, 47, 58–59, 134–136, 139 et seq., 159, 164 and 174. Union of Turkish Bar Associations, consolidated text.

[2] Professional Rules of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations (TBB), in particular Arts. 31 and 35–37. TBB, 2024 text.

[3] Aday, Nejat. "Reflections on the Breach of the Ban on Representing Conflicting Interests and Its Legal Consequences" (Avukatın Çatışan Menfaatleri Temsil Yasağının İhlali ve Hukuksal Sonuçları Üzerine Düşünceler), in Festschrift for Ersin Çamoğlu, Istanbul, 2013, pp. 249–265.

[4] Aday, Nejat. "The Fact of the 'Same Matter' in the Ban on Representing Conflicting Interests and the Place of That Ban among the Professional Duties of the Attorney" (Avukatın Çatışan Menfaatleri Temsil Yasağı Bakımından 'Aynı İş' Olgusu ve Bu Yasağın Avukatın Mesleki Yükümlülükleri İçindeki Yeri), Erciyes University Law Faculty Journal, 10(2), 2015, pp. 1–35. Journal record and full text.

[5] Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098, in particular Arts. 27, 42, 49, 112, 503, 506 and 512. Turkish Grand National Assembly, text of the law.

[6] Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100, in particular Arts. 72, 77, 81–82, 371 and 375. Ministry of Justice, legislation record.

[7] Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271, Art. 152. Ministry of Justice, legislation record.

[8] Turkish Penal Code No. 5237, in particular Art. 257. Ministry of Justice, legislation record.

[9] Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes, Art. 9(4). Ministry of Justice, text of the law.

[10] TBB Disciplinary Board, 01.06.2007, E. 2007/113, K. 2007/175. Full text of the decision.

[11] TBB Disciplinary Board, 02.01.2013, E. 2012/551, K. 2013/86. Full text of the decision.

[12] TBB Disciplinary Board, 07.02.2014, E. 2013/102, K. 2014/67. Full text of the decision.

[13] TBB Disciplinary Board, 06.05.2021, E. 2021/277, K. 2021/333. Full text of the decision.

[14] TBB Disciplinary Board, 11.07.2025, E. 2025/396, K. 2025/483. Full text of the decision.

[15] Court of Cassation Criminal General Assembly (Yargıtay Ceza Genel Kurulu), 23.02.2021, E. 2018/19, K. 2021/53. Full text of the decision.

[16] Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice), 14.05.2009, IX ZR 60/08, in particular paras. 7–12 of the reasoning. Full text of the decision.

[17] Solicitors Regulation Authority. Conflicts of interest, 2 March 2020. Institutional guidance.

[18] American Bar Association. Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.7: Conflict of Interest—Current Clients, Comment, in particular paras. 2–4, 14–17, 23 and 29–35. Commentary on the rule.

[19] Law No. 7571 amending the Turkish Penal Code and certain other laws, and Decree-Law No. 631, adopted 24.12.2025; Official Gazette 25.12.2025, no. 33118; in particular Arts. 5–10. Turkish Grand National Assembly, text of the law.