Legal Bulletin
Turkey Legal News — 18 May 2026: AI Court System, Bar Association
Published 18 May 2026·9 min read
The week of 18 May 2026 brought significant developments across Turkish law. Justice Minister Gürlek announced UYAP Al, an AI-powered decision-support system that will make 30 million high court rulings searchable in seconds. The Turkish Bar Association (TBB) issued a sharp rejection of a bill that would allow foreign-capital companies to provide legal advisory services in Turkey. The Official Gazette published amendments to concordato, enforcement personnel, and shipping agency regulations.
Legal Profession News
UYAP Al Decision Support System: AI to Index 30 Million Court Rulings
Justice Minister Akın Gürlek announced the launch of "UYAP Al Decision Support System" as part of Turkey's judiciary digitalisation programme. UYAP (National Judicial Network Information System) is the electronic infrastructure connecting all Turkish courts and prosecutors' offices, in continuous use since approximately 2004 as the primary workflow tool across courthouses.
Key capabilities of the new AI module:
- 30 million+ high court rulings and precedents searchable within seconds
- Faster precedent research for judges and prosecutors
- Automatic summarisation of case files running to hundreds of pages
- Drafting assistance for reasoned decisions and evidence analysis
- Comparative analysis of expert reports against existing precedents
- Side-by-side comparison of witness and suspect statements
Legal context: Precedent research is one of the most time-consuming stages of legal practice in Turkey. Limited search capabilities across Yargıtay (Court of Cassation) and Danıştay (Council of State) decisions have historically made finding applicable precedents difficult.
Practical implications: Deploying AI to judges and prosecutors may reduce "no applicable precedent" dismissals. It also raises new procedural questions around algorithmic bias and the transparency of AI-assisted judicial decisions — issues likely to reach Turkish courts in the near future.
TBB: Foreign-Capital Company Legal Advisory Bill Threatens Bar Independence
The Turkish Bar Association (TBB) issued a press statement opposing a bill submitted to the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (TBMM) that would amend Law No. 4875 on Direct Foreign Investment to allow foreign-capital companies to provide "legal advisory services" in Turkey through in-house legal staff.
Current position: Under Law No. 1136 on the Bar (Avukatlık Kanunu), legal advisory practice in Turkey is exclusively reserved for lawyers enrolled with Turkish bars. Foreign lawyers or law firms are not permitted to advise directly on Turkish law.
The bill's scope: The proposed amendment would permit foreign-capital companies to engage in legal advisory work under Turkish law through in-house counsel employed by those entities — a significant departure from the current framework.
TBB's objection: The statement characterised the bill as "entirely contrary to the independence of the defence, the autonomy of the legal profession, and the rule of law." Central Anatolia bar presidents convened in Niğde this week as part of ongoing coordination against the proposal.
Who is affected: Lawyers working with foreign-capital companies, international business law practices, and the organised bar as a whole — this bill directly targets the professional monopoly at the core of Turkish bar regulation.
12th Judicial Package and Violence Against Lawyers: Bar Presidents Meet in Niğde
The Extended Central Anatolia Regional Bar Presidents Meeting was hosted by Niğde Bar Association. The agenda covered:
- Violence against lawyers and the security of the defence
- The bar's position on the 12th Judicial Package
- A roadmap for addressing the core challenges facing the legal profession
Legal context: The 12th Judicial Package is a broad judicial reform bill under debate in the TBMM. It is understood to contain changes to procedural law, pre-trial detention rules, and provisions directly affecting the practice of law.
Last week's 61st Bar Presidents Meeting had submitted a 5-step anti-violence action plan to the TBMM. This week's meeting continues the regional coordination effort.
SGK Daily Meal Allowance Exemption Raised to 300 TL
The Social Security Institution (SGK) published a new circular raising the daily SGK premium exemption for meal allowances to 300 TL for employees in workplaces that do not provide meals in kind — whether the allowance is paid in cash or via meal card.
Previous position: The daily exemption threshold was lower; amounts above that threshold were included in the premium base.
New rule: Employers may pay up to 300 TL per day in meal allowance without triggering premium contributions; any excess is included in the premium base.
Who is affected: Employment lawyers advising on salary structuring and employment contracts. Employer clients still calculating under the old threshold need to be updated.
HSK Dismisses Two Prosecutors in Samandağ Disciplinary Investigation
The HSK Second Chamber dismissed two public prosecutors serving in Samandağ from the profession following a comprehensive disciplinary investigation.
The allegations against prosecutors M.A. and H.S. included maintaining improper relationships with suspects, committing irregularities in investigations, and leaving hundreds of case files pending for extended periods.
Legal context: Under Law No. 2802 on Judges and Prosecutors, disciplinary sanctions range from reprimand to dismissal from the profession. HSK applied the most severe sanction, affirming both public trust and the duty of effective investigation. A Danıştay (Council of State) appeal is available against dismissal decisions.
Official Gazette
Concordato Applications Must Now Meet Financial Reporting Standards
An amendment to the Regulation on Documents to be Appended to a Concordato Application made it mandatory for companies applying for concordato to submit financial statements prepared in accordance with specified reporting standards.
Previous position: There was no standardised format requirement for financial statements in concordato applications, regardless of company size.
New framework:
- Large-scale companies: Must apply Turkish Accounting Standards (TMS)
- Mid-sized companies: Must follow the standards designated specifically for them
- Small-scale debtors: Apply Tax Procedure Law (VUK) rules
Effective: 13 May 2026 (Official Gazette, Issue 33252)
Who is affected: Companies preparing concordato applications, financial advisors, and commercial law practitioners assisting with filings. Confirming which accounting standard a client is subject to is now a mandatory pre-filing step.
Comprehensive New Shipping Agents Regulation: Authorisation and Financial Capacity Requirements
The Shipping Agents Regulation was published in the Official Gazette dated 14 May 2026 and entered into force. The regulation comprehensively governs the activities, authorisation, training, supervision, documentation, financial capacity requirements and transitional arrangements for shipping agents and their personnel.
Legal context: Shipping agents act as the interface between shipowners or operators and port operations, handling customs, cargo, and port procedures on behalf of principals. The new regulation addresses gaps in the previous framework — particularly in financial capacity requirements — that had created uncertainty in practice.
Practical implications: Existing agencies must review their documentation and financial capacity under the new authorisation requirements within the transitional period. An important reference point for maritime trade law practitioners.
Enforcement Office Staff Examination: Error Thresholds and Candidate Quotas Revised
An amendment to the Ministry of Justice Regulation on Examinations, Appointment, Transfer, Advancement and Title Changes for Enforcement Personnel updated two key parameters governing personnel examinations.
Changes:
- Acceptable typing error rate: Reduced from 40% to 25% (stricter standard)
- Total error limit: Raised from 14 to 22
- Oral examination candidate ratio: Reduced from 20× vacancies to 10×
Effective: 16 May 2026 (Official Gazette, Issue 33255)
Who is affected: Lawyers monitoring enforcement office staffing and enforcement office personnel. The reduced candidate call ratio directly increases exam competition.
Court of Cassation Rulings
Fraudulent Enforcement Proceedings Must Be Stayed via Interim Injunction
Previous position: When challenging enforcement proceedings alleged to be fraudulent (muvazaalı), it was unclear in practice which procedural remedy to request.
Ruling: The Court of Cassation held that the appropriate relief in an action seeking to void fraudulent enforcement proceedings is an interim injunction (ihtiyati tedbir), and that any sale proceedings linked to those enforcement actions must be stayed by interim injunction order.
Practical importance: For debtors facing suspected fraudulent enforcement, correctly framing the relief request — specifically as an interim injunction — is decisive to stopping a sale. This ruling resolves the uncertainty in how such applications should be drafted.
Court of Cassation, 12th Civil Chamber (HD), E. 2025/6061, K. 2026/311, 21.01.2026
Alimony Under Protective Measures Cannot Bear an Increase Rate Before the Decision Date
Previous position: Whether a maintenance award ordered during divorce proceedings (tedbir nafakası — interim maintenance) could carry an annual increase rate was disputed.
Ruling: The maintenance payable by the liable party from the date of the divorce petition until the final judgment becomes enforceable constitutes interim maintenance (tedbir nafakası). An increase rate cannot be applied to interim maintenance retroactively from the decision date.
Practical importance: Parties seeking to raise interim maintenance during ongoing divorce proceedings must account for this ruling. Requesting a maintenance increase requires either waiting for the judgment to become final or converting to post-divorce alimony (yoksulluk nafakası). A key precedent clarifying the distinction between interim and post-divorce alimony for family law practitioners.
Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber (HD), E. 2022/7271, K. 2022/9297, 15.11.2022
Losing Party Cannot Bear Costs Where Defeat Results from Precedent Change
Previous position: Where a claimant filed a lawsuit relying on the Court of Cassation's then-current position, and later lost because the court changed its view, it was disputed whether litigation costs and legal fees could be imposed.
Ruling: Where a lawsuit filed in reliance on Yargıtay's prior practice is dismissed due to a subsequent change in judicial opinion, no costs or legal fees may be ordered against the claimant.
Practical importance: An important procedural safeguard for clients in areas of unsettled law. Limits the financial exposure of clients filing in good faith before precedent stabilises. A concrete application of legitimate expectation and good faith principles in Turkish civil procedure.
Court of Cassation, 9th Civil Chamber (HD), E. 2024/14039, K. 2025/1420, 12.02.2025
Bank Deposits of a Lawyer Are Not Automatically Deemed Attorney Fees
Previous position: During tax audits, amounts entering a lawyer's bank account were sometimes automatically classified as attorney fees and included in the tax base.
Ruling: Amounts deposited into the bank accounts of a person engaged in legal practice cannot, unless proven otherwise, be automatically classified as attorney fees. Assessing tax on a deficiency derived without first obtaining the testimony of persons in attorney-client relationships with the taxpayer is unlawful.
Practical importance: A critical protective ruling for lawyers facing tax audits. Items such as loans received, borrowed funds, or escrow money must be distinguished from fees — requiring witness evidence from clients before a tax assessment can be made.
Council of State (Danıştay), 3rd Chamber, E. 2017/3584, K. 2021/1450, 22.03.2021
If Parties Reach a Direct Settlement Agreement, Court Must Enter a Dismissal Before Judgment
Legal context: Under Article 26 of the CMK Reconciliation Regulation, parties may reach their own settlement without going through a prosecutor or court-appointed conciliator.
Ruling: Even where a formal reconciliation attempt failed, the parties may reach their own settlement at any point before judgment. On the basis of the agreement drawn up, the court must enter a dismissal order.
Practical importance: The opportunity to settle does not close when an initial reconciliation attempt fails — it remains available through the very last hearing. Criminal defence lawyers should remind clients of this option at every stage of proceedings.
Court of Cassation, 6th Criminal Chamber (CD), E. 2023/17518, K. 2025/7743, 18.09.2025