The 12th Judicial Package Enters Into Force

Significant Amendments to Civil and Criminal Legislation Introduced by Laws No. 7589 and 7590

Laws No. 7589 and 7590, published in the Official Gazette dated 31 July 2026 and numbered 33326, introduce significant amendments across a wide range of legal areas, including the judicial system, civil and criminal procedure, administrative litigation, and the law of obligations.

While Law No. 7589 aims to ensure the more effective conduct of judicial proceedings, reorganize legal remedies, and expand electronic applications; Law No. 7590 sets forth regulations regarding public administration and practice across various statutes.

This newsletter summarizes the prominent changes in practice and their potential impacts.

Sale Procedure for Inherited Immovable Properties Revised in Execution and Bankruptcy Law

With the amendment made to Article 114 of the Execution and Bankruptcy Law by Law No. 7589, the sale procedure for immovable properties acquired entirely through inheritance and in which third parties hold no shares has been reorganized. This auction procedure, to be conducted solely among the heir-owners, shall be applied on a one-time basis.

According to the new regulation, the initial public auction shall be conducted exclusively among the heirs, and the bids must meet the estimated value of the immovable property. If the initial auction proves inconclusive, the general sale procedure shall apply.

Furthermore, sanctions to be imposed on buyers who fail to deposit the tender price in a timely manner, the legal fate of the guarantee, and the principles applicable in cases where the creditor wins the auction have been re-determined. While the regulation grants heir the priority right to acquire the immovable property among themselves, it also aims to prevent the abuse of the tender process. Sales announced prior to the entry into force date shall continue to be subject to the previous provisions.

Procedure Regarding the Electronic Transmission of Notarial Documents Has Been Reorganized

With the amendment made to Article 55 of the Notary Law, the procedure for sending notarial documents to courts and other competent authorities has been updated.

Accordingly, in the event that the original document is requested, the original document shall be sent to the relevant authority; if a certified copy is requested, an electronic copy approved with a secure electronic signature shall be transmitted. In cases where electronic transmission is not possible, physical certified copies shall continue to be utilized.

Additionally, no journal entry number shall be issued for these transactions, and no fee or charge other than postage and travel expenses shall be levied. The regulation aims to accelerate digitization in notarial transactions and document sharing among judicial authorities.

Scope of Lawsuits to be Heard by a Single Judge in Administrative Jurisdiction Has Been Expanded

With the amendment made to Article 7 of Law No. 2576, the scope of disputes to be heard by a single judge in administrative and tax courts has been expanded to include actions for annulment and full remedy actions with a subject matter value not exceeding TRY 486.000 excluding regulatory acts. Furthermore, certain disputes concerning students, public officials, professional organizations, and those arising from Law No. 2022 are envisaged to be decided by a single judge; and it has been enacted that the new provisions shall apply to lawsuits filed after the date of entry into force.

Sale Procedure for Assets within the Scope of Guardianship Has Been Revised

With the amendments made to Articles 440 and 444 of the Turkish Civil Code, it has been adopted that the sale of movable and immovable properties belonging to persons under guardianship shall be executed by execution offices through electronic public auction upon the decision of the guardianship authority. The provisions of the Execution and Bankruptcy Law shall apply to the collection of the sale price, finalization of the tender, and other proceedings, thereby ensuring that the sale process becomes more transparent and auditable.

New Regulation Regarding Persons Who Provide Account Information in Fraud Offenses

With the fourth paragraph added to Article 158 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237, it has been regulated that if the act of a person participating in the crime of fraud is limited solely to providing payment instruments such as bank or credit cards, or information or instruments enabling the use of accounts held with banks, intermediary institutions, payment service providers, or crypto asset service providers to another person for the purpose of obtaining an unfair advantage for such person or another, the sentence to be imposed shall be reduced by half.

Principles Regarding the Protection of Genetic Data Have Been Reorganized

With the amendment made to Article 80 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the principles regarding the storage, use, and destruction of biological samples obtained within the scope of investigations and prosecutions, as well as genetic data derived therefrom, have been redetermined. Thus, it is aimed that genetic data be used solely for the purposes of criminal proceedings and that safeguards regarding the protection of personal data be reinforced.

Scope of Offenses Ineligible for the Suspension of the Pronouncement of the Judgment Has Been Revised

With the amendment made to Article 231 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it has been stipulated that a decision on the suspension of the pronouncement of the judgment cannot be rendered in respect of torture, torment, and certain qualified forms of intentional injury committed by public officials. Apart from this, the general conditions and systematic framework of the suspension of the pronouncement of the judgment institution have been preserved.

Decision of Non-Imposition of a Penalty Regarding a Fugitive Accused Has Been Restricted

With the amendment made to Article 247 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271, it has been enacted that not only a conviction decision, but also a decision stating that decision of non-imposition of a penalty cannot be rendered regarding a fugitive accused who has not yet been interrogated. Furthermore, in cases where a security measure is decided against a fugitive accused, the accused or their defense counsel has been granted the opportunity to request a retrial solely in respect of this decision.

Objection Procedure of the Chief Public Prosecutor of the Court of Cassation Has Been Reorganized

With the amendment made to Article 308 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271, the time limit and procedure for objection by the Chief Public Prosecutor of the Court of Cassation before the Criminal General Assembly against the decisions of the criminal chambers of the Court of Cassation have been reorganized. Accordingly, the Chief Public Prosecutor may object ex officio or upon request within three months from the delivery of the file, whereas no time limit condition shall be required for objections to be made in favor of the accused. Furthermore, persons entitled to request an objection have been explicitly specified, enabling the accused, their legal representatives, and the injured party who joined or has the right to join the proceedings as an intervening party to apply for this remedy.

Appeal Regime Before the Council of State Has Been Reorganized

With the amendment to Article 46 of the Administrative Procedure Law, decisions rendered by regional administrative courts after setting aside the first-instance court’s judgment are, as a general rule, now subject to appeal before the Council of State.

However, the following decisions remain excluded from appellate review: cases heard by a single judge; disputes arising under Laws No. 4081, 3091 and 6458; decisions where the difference between the first-instance and regional administrative court judgments does not exceed the statutory monetary threshold; and decisions relating solely to attorney’s fees and litigation costs.

Statutory Interest Calculation System Has Been Revised

With the amendment made to Law No. 3095, it has been adopted that in cases where a different rate is not agreed upon by contract, the statutory interest to be applied shall be determined on the basis of 80% of the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey’s rediscount rate as of 31 December of the preceding year. Furthermore, if a difference of at least five percentage points occurs in the rediscount rate as of 30 June, the statutory interest rate for the second half of the year shall be recalculated.

Interest and Offsetting Principles in Compensation for Personal Injury and Deprivation of Support Have Been Revised

With the amendment made to Article 55 of the Turkish Code of Obligations, interest is envisaged to accrue from the date of the event for compensation concerning the period where earnings are known, and from the date of the judgment for compensation concerning the period where earnings cannot be determined. It has also been adopted that payments made for the purpose of performance prior to the commencement of the preliminary examination shall be proportionally offset from the final compensation amount. For compensation linked to losses arising from the reduction or loss of working capacity, as well as losses suffered by dependents due to the death of the supporter, the amount paid for performance purposes until the commencement of the preliminary examination shall be proportionally offset from the compensation amount determined according to the date of payment.

The Unquantified Receivables Action Has Been Abolished

Article 107 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been repealed, thereby terminating the institution of action for unquantified receivables. However, previous provisions shall continue to apply to lawsuits filed prior to the entry into force date; the new regulation shall only bear legal consequences regarding lawsuits filed after the entry into force date.

Claim Increases in Partial Actions Have Been Revised

With the provision added to Article 109 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it has been accepted that in a partial action, the relief sought may be increased once until the end of the preliminary examination, without being subject to the prohibition on expanding the claim. Considering the statute of limitations for the increased portion as interrupted as of the lawsuit filing date, it is aimed to prevent loss of rights that might arise following the abolition of the action for unquantified damages.

Interval Between Hearings Capped at Three Months

With the amendment made to Article 147 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it has been stipulated that the interval between hearings cannot, as a rule, exceed three months. In the presence of mandatory reasons such as expert examination, letters of rogatory, or similar grounds, the court may set a later hearing date, provided that it states its reasoning.

Signature Procedure in Electronic Hearings Has Been Simplified

With the amendment made to Article 149 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in procedural acts performed by persons participating in hearings via audio and video transmission, the requirement to obtain physical or handwritten signatures has been removed, except for substantive law transactions specified by law (confession, taking an oath, consent to the withdrawal of the lawsuit, waiver of the lawsuit, acceptance of the lawsuit, and settlement). The regulation aims to conduct electronic hearings in a more practical and effective manner.

Procedure for the Consolidation of Connected Lawsuits Has Been Updated

With the amendments made to Articles 166 and 168 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the procedure regarding the transfer and consolidation of connected lawsuits has been reorganized. Thus, it is aimed to facilitate the aggregation of connected disputes pending before different courts into a single file and deciding upon them jointly.

Provisions Governing Final Decisions Have Been Updated

With the new paragraph added to Article 362 of the Code of Civil Procedure, significant regulations have been introduced regarding the appealability of decisions rendered on the merits anew by regional courts of appeal.

Pursuant to the regulation, in the event that the regional Court of Appeal partially or completely accepts the appeal application and renders a decision on the merits anew, not only the general appeal thresholds but also the monetary difference between the first-instance court decision and the regional court of appeal decision shall be taken into account regarding the appealability of the judgment. Furthermore, the regulation provides that decisions falling below a specific monetary threshold whose difference from the first-instance court decision does not exceed the finality limit for Court of Appeal, as well as decisions containing modifications solely regarding litigation expenses or attorney’s fees, cannot be appealed.

With the amendment in question, it is intended to prevent limited corrections made by courts of appeal on first-instance court decisions from being subjected to Court of Cassation review and to ensure uniformity of practice in the assessment of appealability.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.