A Second Opinion in an Ongoing Case: How Is a Case File Reviewed?

A second legal opinion may be requested from another lawyer about an ongoing case. Such a review helps to understand the current state of the file, the evidence, the method being followed and the options available. However, requesting a second opinion does not stop limitation periods, does not automatically dismiss the current lawyer, and does not automatically appoint the new lawyer as counsel of record. The scope of the review and the rules on informing the previous lawyer and on joint representation must be clarified before the engagement is accepted. [1–3]

This guide is aimed at persons who wish to have a file review carried out for an ongoing dispute in Türkiye. Certain concrete procedural rules are explained for civil litigation; access to the file and expert opinions in criminal investigations are addressed separately. It should not be assumed that the same time limits apply in tax, administrative, enforcement and criminal proceedings.

What is a legal second opinion, and what does it provide?

A legal second opinion is a professional review, carried out separately from an earlier assessment of an existing matter and based on specific information and documents. The subject of the review may be the whole case, but it may also be only a court-appointed expert report, a settlement proposal, an appeal, or a particular procedural problem. Article 35 of the Attorneyship Law No. 1136 (Avukatlık Kanunu) provides for giving opinions on legal matters among a lawyer's professional activities. [1]

A good file review shows which outcome can be defended and why. It weighs together the facts on which the claim rests, the difficulties of proof, the serious objections of the opposing party and the procedural opportunities that are still available. A mere summary of the petitions in the file is not sufficient for this purpose.

It is also a meaningful result if a second opinion confirms the current approach. Different lawyers may draw different legal assessments from the same documents. That difference by itself does not show negligence or professional fault. The assessment must be made on the basis of the information available at the time of the act, the applicable law, the instructions given and the options available.

May I consult another lawyer while I have a lawyer?

The existence of a current lawyer does not in itself prohibit requesting another legal assessment. However, consultancy, taking on the same matter, the joining of a second counsel to the case and a change of lawyer have different consequences. What is assessed is the actual scope of the work, not merely its label. [1]

How is the duty to inform the previous lawyer assessed?

Under Article 135 of the Attorneyship Law, as amended by Law No. 7571 dated 24 December 2025, the sub-paragraph (k) of paragraph (1), which provides for the sanction of a warning, expressly provides that information must not be withheld from a lawyer previously given a power of attorney on the same matter before the matter is accepted. For this reason it cannot be concluded that there is no duty to inform the previous lawyer merely because a service is described as a "second opinion" or "file analysis". The lawyer giving the opinion must assess the existing representative relationship and the work to be undertaken from the outset. [1, Art. 135]

A current decision on this point is also important. By its decision of 19 February 2026, E. 2024/2990, K. 2026/357, the Board of Administrative Litigation Chambers of the Council of State (Danıştay İdari Dava Daireleri Kurulu) quashed the decision of 2 May 2024 that annulled Article 39 of the Professional Rules of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations (TBB). The dispute concerned the submission of powers of attorney to case files, and attendance at hearings, without notifying the previous lawyer. The Board found the notification rule lawful from the point of view of professional courtesy, the efforts of the previous lawyer and professional order, and referred the file back to the Chamber for a new decision. [2, pp. 3–9]

The Board treated the client's request for consent from the first lawyer and the second lawyer's duty of notification as complementary rules. The decision on the regulatory act was taken unanimously. The dissent on the individual disciplinary penalty relates to the effect on the pending dispute of the Constitutional Court's annulment of the earlier disciplinary provisions. This decision should not be extended so as to resolve, by itself, all the consequences of every limited form of consultancy. [2, pp. 7–11]

The practical result for the reader is this: the existing lawyer relationship must be disclosed before the review is accepted; and the scope and method of the necessary notification must be determined. A "cancellation" note for Article 39 that appears in an older text cannot be used as the current outcome without taking into account the 2025 amendment to the law and the 2026 quashing decision. [1–3]

What happens if a second lawyer joins the case?

Article 172 of the Attorneyship Law regulates the client's engagement of other lawyers in the prosecution and defence of the matter. Under the provision, the written consent of the first lawyer is requested; for this purpose a period of at least one week is given in the written notice sent to that lawyer. Failure to reply within the period is deemed consent. Where the first lawyer does not consent, the law provides that the contract of representation ends automatically and that the full fee is payable. Even where there is consent, no reduction may be made from the first lawyer's fee in the proceedings. [1, Art. 172]

This provision does not mean that every answer given on a file is automatically treated as joint representation. However, filing a petition, appearing at a hearing or taking over the follow-up of the case may show that the framework of mere consultancy has been exceeded. The rules on the choice and appointment of defence counsel in criminal proceedings are also observed separately. [1; 5, Art. 149]

Does obtaining a second opinion amount to removing the lawyer?

A request for a second opinion alone is not a revocation of the mandate. Removal of a lawyer requires a separate declaration of intention and the relevant procedural steps. The effect of the revocation or resignation of a lawyer on the court and the opposing party is regulated in Article 81 of the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (HMK). The financial consequences are determined under Article 174 of the Attorneyship Law, particularly by assessing just cause and allegations of fault or negligence on the part of the lawyer. [1, Art. 174; 4, Art. 81]

For this reason, a second-opinion report is not automatically treated as a "document establishing just cause for removal". If the transfer of the file to another lawyer is being considered, notifications, the approaching hearing, pending procedural steps, the transfer of documents and the fee relationship must be considered together.

In which situations may a case file review be useful?

A second opinion may be useful in particular for clarifying a concrete question before an important decision is made:

• Where there are unexplained differences between the result of an expert report and the documents on the file.
• Where a text containing a settlement, waiver, acknowledgment or release is to be signed.
• Where options for challenge are to be assessed following a reasoned judgment.
• Where the cost of the case has increased while the result that may be obtained, and the prospect of recovery, have become uncertain.
• Where a new document or a new defence by the opposing party affects the earlier assessment.
• Where it cannot be understood from the existing explanations why the file has developed in the way it has.

In every case, the question to be answered must first be identified. Questions such as "What is the calculation in the report based on?", "Which of my claims does this settlement end?" or "Against which reasoning of the judgment might an application be considered?" make the purpose of the review concrete, rather than "review my file". Where there is a problem affecting the whole file, the review should not be confined to a narrow document.

Which documents are required for a case file review?

The documents needed depend on the dispute. The essential aim is that the reviewing lawyer can compare the account of events with the records actually on the file. Sending only one's own petition or documents favourable to oneself may cause the defence of the opposing party and the interlocutory decisions of the court to be overlooked.

The documents should be placed in chronological order; a short chronology of events and the questions to be answered should be added. Documents that are known to be missing should be identified separately. A screenshot of a report does not always show the whole report and its annexes. Where possible, the verifiable original of a digital document should be preserved together with a readable copy.

The authority of a person requesting an opinion on behalf of a company to be represented, and the authority of a person applying on behalf of another to share the relevant information and documents, are also checked separately. Being a family member does not mean that one has authority to access all the information in every file.

What stages should a file review consist of?

Facts, claims and evidence are read together

At the first stage, the sequence of events, the parties, the legal consequence sought and the evidence alleged to support it are identified. The presence of a document in the file and its timely and proper presentation as evidence are different matters. Who bears the burden of proof, and by which evidence a particular allegation may be proved, are assessed. Article 189 of the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (HMK) links the right to prove to time limits and procedure, and also provides that evidence obtained unlawfully may not be taken into account. [4]

The review must also include the strong defence of the opposing party. An objection such as payment, limitation, jurisdiction, standing or the reliability of a document may affect the outcome. The report should show on which assumption the possibility favourable to the reader depends.

Options are determined according to the stage of the file

Whether an argument that may be legally raised can procedurally be raised at that stage of the case is separately examined. A step that is possible at the petition stage is not the same as a review at the appeal stage. Late presentation of evidence is also not unlimited: Article 145 of the HMK makes the showing of evidence after the statutory period subject to the court's permission under certain conditions. [4]

Questions of jurisdiction, standing, conditions of action, mediation where applicable, and needs for interim legal protection are assessed according to the type of file. A new action or a new application is not needed for every second opinion. The procedural opportunities that can still be used in the existing file are separated from matters requiring an independent legal route.

An expert report is examined for its conclusion, method and data

It is not enough to look only at the conclusion section of a report. The task given to the expert, the documents used, the accounting period, the measurement or assessment method, the assumptions and whether the objections have been answered with reasons should be examined. Where a technical error must be investigated, the opinion of an expert in the relevant field may be needed. The lawyer's legal review must not replace the technical expertise that the lawyer does not have.

In civil proceedings, under Article 281 of the HMK, a two-week period from service of the report is provided for a request to complete deficiencies in the report, to clarify uncertainties, or to appoint a new expert. Where the request is very difficult or impossible to prepare, or requires special or technical work, a single additional period not exceeding two weeks may be granted, provided that application is made within the same period. An additional period does not arise automatically. [4, Art. 281]

The judge freely assesses the expert's opinion together with the other evidence. Accordingly, the fact that the report is unfavourable does not mean the case will necessarily be lost, and the obtaining of a new special report does not mean it will necessarily be won. [4, Art. 282]

Which questions should a written legal opinion answer?

The scope of the written opinion must be consistent with the file and with the work undertaken. For the reader to understand and use the assessment, the following elements are useful:

• The question examined, the stage of the file and the date of the assessment.
• The documents examined, and the documents not seen or missing.
• The facts accepted, and the assumptions that still need to be verified.
• The applicable law, the relevant decisions and any differences of opinion.
• The strong and weak points, and the basic defence of the opposing party.
• The options available, the time limits, the costs and the legal consequences that may be expected.
• Priority steps and who will undertake them.
• The aspects in which a new document or development may change the assessment.

A single-sentence opinion of the kind "the case will be won" does not replace these explanations. Article 34 of the Professional Rules of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations (TBB) preserves the distinction between a lawyer expressing a view on the outcome of a case and that view being treated as a guarantee. [6]

Are a legal opinion, a court-appointed expert report and an expert opinion the same?

No. The report of an expert appointed by the court, the scientific expert opinion obtained by a party, and the legal assessment prepared by a lawyer within the scope of consultancy do not hold the same procedural position. The title given to a document does not by itself determine its function in court.

Article 293 of the HMK provides that the parties may obtain a scientific opinion from their expert on the event in dispute. For this reason alone, no separate period may be requested. The judge may summon the expert to attend; an expert who does not attend the hearing to which they were summoned without a valid excuse has the report not taken into account in assessment. The submission of a legal opinion does not remove the judge's duty to apply Turkish law of their own motion. [4, Arts. 33, 293]

The study by Mikail Bora Kaplan on the contradiction between a court-appointed expert report and an expert opinion emphasises the separation of these two sources and the reasoned treatment of a serious contradiction. The contribution of this approach to file review is not to stop at saying "the two reports differ", but to show at which point of the data, method or inference the difference arises. The author's comparative law explanations do not mean that the same sequence of steps is mandatory in every file in Türkiye. [7, pp. 560–561, 574–576]

Scientific opinion in criminal proceedings is separately regulated under Article 67(6) of the CMK. The objection period for an expert report in a civil case cannot be carried over to a criminal file as it is; the stage of the file and the period granted by the relevant authority must be examined. [5]

How are time limits protected while a second opinion is being obtained?

Making an appointment for review, sending the documents or waiting for a report does not replace the statutory time limits. Under Article 94 of the HMK, failure to carry out an act that must be done within a fixed period may result in the loss of the right to perform it. For this reason, the nearest time-limited document should be identified at the first contact. [4]

In civil proceedings, the general period for appeal under Article 345 of the HMK is two weeks and runs from proper service of the judgment; special provisions of law are reserved. Article 361 of the HMK also provides a two-week period from service for decisions stated to be open to cassation. It cannot be assumed that every decision is open to a legal remedy, or that these periods apply in all branches of the judiciary. [4]

For example, hypothetically, a person may have only booked an inspection appointment after an expert report was served. If the appointment date falls after the objection period, the appointment record does not preserve the time limit. First the act that must be performed within its time limit and the conditions of any additional period request are assessed; the timing of the comprehensive report is planned separately.

How are confidentiality, conflicts of interest and access to the file ensured?

Before a file is accepted, a conflict-of-interest check must be carried out by reference to the identity of the parties and of connected persons. Article 38 of the Attorneyship Law regulates grounds for refusal, such as previously having given legal advice or an opinion to a party whose interests are opposed in the same matter. The fact that the review is short, or that no power of attorney has yet been granted, does not render this check unimportant. [1]

The lawyer's duty of professional secrecy is regulated in Article 36 of the Attorneyship Law. Article 37 of the Professional Rules covers information learned because of an application by a person whose case the lawyer has not accepted. The purpose of processing personal data in the sharing of documents, the amount of data necessary and security measures are separately observed. Health, child and criminal-file information must not be transferred to unnecessary persons or to unnecessary tools. [1; 6; 8]

Sharing one's e-Devlet password should not be adopted as the standard method of file review. The official e-Devlet security notice (e-Devlet, the Turkish government services portal) requires that the password not be shared with anyone. Documents may be obtained from the person's own account and sent through the designated secure sharing channel; whether a lawyer may carry out a review within the scope of their own professional access and representation powers is also separately assessed. [9]

Article 46 of the Attorneyship Law distinguishes between reviewing a case and litigation file without a power of attorney and taking copies from the file. This provision cannot be read as an unlimited right of electronic access to all files. In criminal investigations, Article 153 of the CMK separately regulates the defence counsel's access, restriction orders that may be issued on lawful conditions, and certain groups of documents to which a restriction may not apply. The content of a document that has not been seen must not be guessed at in order to form a definitive opinion. [1; 5]

How are the file review fee and the scope of service determined?

In assessing the fee, not only the volume of the file but also its legal and technical complexity, the questions to be examined, urgency, the need for translation and the scope of the written report are taken into account. The fee provisions of the Attorneyship Law and the Minimum Attorney Fee Schedule (Avukatlık Asgari Ücret Tarifesi) in force are observed. Accordingly, it cannot be said that there is a single review fee applicable to every file. [1, Arts. 163–164, 168]

Before work begins, it should be clarified which of the following form part of the service: an oral consultation, a written report, obtaining documents, additional review and follow-up of the case. Taxes, payments to third parties and the charging for additional work should also be determined. The review fee and the court fee, expert costs or the fee for following the case may be different items. These items are dealt with separately in the explanations on fees, fees payable to the court and costs.

A written record of the scope is useful for proof and communication. Article 163 of the Attorneyship Law, however, provides that agreements not in writing are proved under the general rules. It cannot therefore be said that no professional relationship or liability arises merely because no signed contract exists.

How should one proceed after a second opinion?

First, the urgent steps identified in the report should be separated from proposals that may be assessed later. In continuing work with the current lawyer, the bases of the different assessment and the questions may be shared openly. The review must not turn into criticism of a colleague's character; the discussion should be conducted on documents, legal reasoning and concrete steps. [1, Art. 135; 6]

Where there are conflicting opinions, it is checked which documents were examined, which assumptions were used, and whether the dates of the assessments are the same. The source of a difference of opinion is sometimes a missing document, or an event accepted differently, rather than a rule of law.

If a new route is proposed, its aspects of time, cost, proof and feasibility must be discussed. In assessing a settlement, the rights to be waived and the performances to be carried out are weighed; in considering continuing the action, the expected benefit, additional cost and prospect of recovery are examined together. At the end of the review, it must not be left unclear by whom and to what extent a step is to be undertaken. For the initial division of tasks, the explanations on the application and matter-acceptance process may also be consulted.

In international professional publications too, a second opinion is treated as a limited independent assessment. In the work by Matthew Hector published by the Illinois State Bar Association, the written opinion, the consultation and a pre-defined scope of review are explained together. This methodological example may be drawn on, but notification, confidentiality or representation rules of a foreign country cannot be transferred directly to Türkiye. [10]

File review and written legal opinion from Güneş & Güneş

Güneş & Güneş Law Firm may, on request, review your ongoing case file through an independent professional assessment appropriate to the stage it has reached, and prepare a written legal opinion report. This work aims to view the file from a third perspective, and to assess the current approach, the strong and weak points, the legal risks and the options available on the basis of the documents.

An independent assessment means forming a professional view without any obligation to confirm or reject an opinion previously given. The review is carried out independently of the expectations of the person seeking a favourable opinion; facts and uncertainties unfavourable to the person are also explained in the report. The report is not an impartial expert report appointed by the court, nor a guarantee of the outcome of the case. [1; 6]

What is assessed in the legal opinion report?

Within the agreed scope of review, the current stage of the case, claims and defences, evidence, expert reports, interlocutory decisions, notifications and any appellate documents are considered together. The written report explains, with reasons, the strong and weak points of the file, the difficulties of proof, the procedural risks and the options that follow.

Where appropriate, the legal and economic effects of the options of settlement, continuing the case, objection or legal remedy are assessed, together with expenses and the prospect of recovery. Documents still to be completed, priority steps and matters requiring special technical expertise are indicated. No percentage chance of winning is given that the file does not support; the documents or assumptions on which each assessment rests are shown.

How is a file review request made?

A consultation and appointment request may be sent to begin. The first request should state a short summary of the dispute, the stage the case has reached, the current lawyer relationship and, in particular, any imminent hearing or application deadline. Sensitive file documents should not be attached to the first application before a secure sharing method has been agreed.

At the preliminary meeting, the questions to be answered are clarified. Checks are made through the parties and the authority to represent; the conflict of interest and the duty to inform the previous lawyer are assessed. The scope of the review, the fee, the language of the report and the method of delivery are determined at the acceptance of the matter. How the representative relationship with the current lawyer will be maintained is also clarified. [1]

How is a complete copy of the file prepared for the review?

For the agreed review, a complete and legible copy of the current file, with its annexes, must be obtained. The claim and answer petitions, the documents submitted by the opposing party, the hearing records, interlocutory decisions, reports, notification records and, where they exist, the reasoned judgment should be prepared together. The file number, the court or relevant authority, and a short chronology of the events should also be added.

A list of documents is drawn up on delivery. Gaps or documents that cannot be accessed are notified to the applicant. Sending only selected screenshots or favourable documents does not mean that the whole file has been reviewed. Where a limited preliminary opinion is requested despite missing documents, its scope and limits are recorded separately.

How are review and confidentiality ensured through UYAP?

The applicant may obtain the file documents accessible to them in the UYAP Citizen Portal, logged in with their own account, and share them through the designated secure channel. The lawyer's direct electronic review is conducted within their own professional account and the access, review or representation powers required by law. The necessary powers of attorney and other authorisations are determined according to the file, and access restrictions are observed. [1, Art. 46; 5, Art. 153]

Güneş & Güneş Law Firm does not request your e-Devlet password or one-time verification code for a file review. Instead of sharing a password, document provision and access based on authority are used. The official e-Devlet security notices likewise state that the password must not be shared with anyone. [9]

Information and documents shared during the application are handled for the purposes of assessing the request, carrying out the agreed legal service and fulfilling the relevant legal obligations, in accordance with the principles of professional secrecy and the protection of personal data. Access is restricted to persons who need it in the performance of their duties. [1; 6; 8]

Within how many working days is the written legal opinion delivered at the latest?

After the complete delivery of the information and documents required for the review, the agreement on the scope of service and fee, and the completion of the acceptance of the matter, the written legal opinion report is delivered within seven working days at the latest. The first working day following the day on which these conditions are jointly completed is the first day of the period. Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays are not counted. The start date and the planned delivery date are notified in writing.

Where the scope of the file, the review of several linked files, translation, a technical expert's opinion or the obtaining of documents from an external body requires a special period, the reason and the projected delivery date are explained and separately agreed before acceptance of the work. If an unforeseen need arises during the review, the applicant is informed without delay; before the existing delivery period expires, a new date is mutually agreed in writing. Seven working days is not a statutory litigation period; it is the delivery period of this review service.

How are urgent time limits and the steps after the report handled?

A request for an appointment, the delivery of documents and waiting for a report do not suspend objection, appeal, cassation or time limits set by the court. Where a deadline is near, it must be specifically stated at the first contact. Whether an urgent review is possible, and which lawyer will undertake the step that protects the time limit, are also determined separately. [4]

The report is delivered by the agreed secure method; the scope of the evaluation meeting at which the findings and options will be explained is determined at the outset. Preparation of a written opinion does not mean that the follow-up of the case, attendance at a hearing or the filing of a petition has been undertaken alone. Subsequent tasks are agreed separately. Since a new document or development may affect the opinion in the report, any further assessment need is also addressed separately.

Conclusion

The value of a second opinion in an ongoing case lies in making the file more intelligible and in setting out the options for decision together with their reasons. A competent assessment shows, together, the documents seen, the time limits in force, the strong and weak points, the defence of the opposing party and the consequences of the proposed step. Confirmation of the current approach may also be a useful outcome of this review.

For a reliable start, the question to be answered must be identified, the current file and notification records prepared, the current lawyer relationship explained and the scope of service clarified. The duty to inform, joint representation and removal must not be confused, and while the report is awaited the person responsible for time-limited steps must be clear.

A good second opinion is not merely an opinion that reaches a different result; it is an assessment that explains which document, because of which rule of law, makes which option possible or risky.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do I need to dismiss my current lawyer in order to obtain a second opinion?

No. A request for a second opinion alone does not require removal. However, for the acceptance of the same matter and the joining of a second lawyer to the case, the rules on information, consent and scope of service must be assessed. For details, see the section on disclosure of the existing lawyer relationship.

Can a second opinion be obtained without informing the previous lawyer under any circumstances?

A general guarantee of that kind cannot be given. The current Attorneyship Law contains a provision on the lawyer who accepts the same matter informing the previous lawyer. An exception should not be drawn merely on the basis of the label "consultancy" before the actual scope of the work has been determined.

Can a review be carried out if my case file is incomplete?

A limited preliminary assessment may be possible. However, documents not seen and the ways in which they might affect the outcome must be clearly stated. It is not appropriate to state a definitive conclusion about the whole case on the basis of an incomplete file.

Does waiting for a second-opinion report stop the objection period?

No. A request for a report does not itself suspend the time limit. Any statutory conditions for an additional period or another procedural opportunity must be separately satisfied. The time-limit check table shows this distinction.

Does a written legal opinion bind the court?

No. The basis, content and manner of procedural submission of the opinion are assessed; the duty to decide belongs to the court. A lawyer's written assessment is not the same as a report of an expert appointed by the court.

Does two lawyers thinking differently show that the first lawyer was wrong?

Not on its own. First the documents examined, the assumptions, the date of the events and the legal reasoning must be compared. A claim of professional fault or of just cause for removal is assessed separately on concrete facts.

Should I give my e-Devlet password so that my file can be reviewed?

No. The official e-Devlet security warning requires that the password not be shared with anyone. Documents should be sent through a secure channel, and the necessary professional access to the file should be handled within the lawyer's own authority. [9]

Must the lawyer who gives a second opinion also follow my case?

The scope of the file review and the undertaking of follow-up of the case are determined separately. Where it has been agreed only that an opinion will be given, it should not be assumed that attendance at hearings, notifications and follow-up of applications has also been accepted. The actual scope of the existing agreement is what counts.

How many working days does it take to obtain a written legal opinion from Güneş & Güneş?

It is at most seven working days, counted from the first working day after the complete delivery of the required documents, the determination of scope and fee, and the completion of the acceptance of the matter. Where a special review is required, the reason and the delivery date are agreed separately. This period does not suspend court or application time limits. Details are explained in the section on the delivery period for the report.

Sources and legal bases

1. Attorneyship Law No. 1136 (Avukatlık Kanunu), in particular Arts. 35–38, 46, 135, 163–164, 168, 172 and 174.
2. Board of Administrative Litigation Chambers of the Council of State (Danıştay İdari Dava Daireleri Kurulu), 19 February 2026, E. 2024/2990, K. 2026/357, in particular pp. 3–11.
3. Union of Turkish Bar Associations (Türkiye Barolar Birliği), Announcement No. 2026/27 of 8 July 2026.
4. Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu), in particular Arts. 33, 71, 81, 94, 145, 189–190, 266, 281–282, 293, 345 and 361.
5. Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271 (Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu), in particular Arts. 67, 149 and 153.
6. Professional Rules of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations (Türkiye Barolar Birliği Meslek Kuralları), in particular Arts. 34–38; for Art. 39, see also the 2026 decision and announcement above.
7. Kaplan, Mikail Bora, "Resolving the Contradiction between a Court-Appointed Expert Report and an Expert Opinion in Civil Procedure" ("Medenî Usûl Hukukunda Bilirkişi Raporu ile Uzman Görüşü Arasındaki Çelişkinin Giderilmesi"), Türk-Alman Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi (Turkish-German University Faculty of Law Journal), 2022, 4(2), pp. 557–586.
8. Personal Data Protection Law No. 6698 (Kişisel Verilerin Korunması Kanunu), in particular Arts. 4–6 and 12.
9. e-Devlet Gateway (e-Devlet Kapısı), "For Your Security" ("Güvenliğiniz İçin").
10. Hector, Matthew, "Law firm offers second opinions for clients", Illinois Bar Journal, July 2017, Vol. 105, No. 7, p. 12.