The decision of the 3rd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (“Court of Cassation”) dated 07/04/2025, file number 2025/590, decision number 2025/1899 (“Decision”) was published in the Official Gazette dated June 10, 2025, issue number 32922.

The Decision concerns the procedural and legal irregularity of the court converting the foreign currency payment made by the consumer plaintiff for a package tour fee into Turkish lira at the exchange rate on the payment date, despite the plaintiff’s claim for the Turkish lira equivalent as of the date of the lawsuit.

In summary, the facts subject to the Decision are as follows:

• The plaintiff consumer purchased a package tour service amounting to 18,880.80 Euros but, having not benefited from the service at all, requested a refund of this amount. Within the scope of the option right regulated under Article 99 of the Turkish Code of Obligations, the plaintiff demanded the Turkish lira equivalent of the foreign currency paid calculated at the exchange rate on the date of the lawsuit, May 5, 2021 (18,919.54 TRY).
• However, the first-instance court calculated the amount based on the exchange rate on the date the foreign currency payment was made, October 25, 2019, and ruled in favor of the plaintiff accordingly.

Referring to the provision of Article 99/3 of the Turkish Code of Obligations, which states:

“If the debt is stipulated in a currency other than the national currency, and unless the contract explicitly requires payment in the original currency or a similar expression is present, upon failure to pay on the due date, the creditor may request payment of the debt either in the original currency or in the national currency calculated at the value prevailing on the due date or the actual date of payment.”

The Court of Cassation emphasized that:

• The plaintiff clearly exercised the option right in the lawsuit petition by requesting the Turkish lira equivalent of the foreign currency paid as of the date of the lawsuit.
• Despite this explicit preference, the lower court’s calculation based on the exchange rate at the payment date and its ruling accordingly is contrary to procedural rules and the law.

Accordingly, the Ministry of Justice’s request for retrial in the interest of the law was accepted, and the first-instance court’s decision was overturned.

The full text of the Decision can be accessed at: https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2025/06/20250610-9.pdf

Best Regards,
Balay, Eryiğit & Erten

The Regulation Amending the Regulation on Distance Contracts (“Regulation”), which introduces significant provisions regarding the right of withdrawal, was published in the Official Gazette dated 24 May 2025 and numbered 32909. The amendments will enter into force on 1 January 2026, and are as follows:

• In the event that the consumer exercises the right of withdrawal, the return shipping cost may not be charged to the consumer; this cost shall be borne by the seller or the provider.

With the Regulation, subparagraph (g) of the first paragraph of Article 5, paragraphs 4 and 5 of Article 12, and paragraph 3 of Article 13 of the Regulation on Distance Contracts have been revised.

With these amendments:

• If the consumer returns the goods by exercising the right of withdrawal and uses the carrier specified by the seller in the preliminary information, no return cost may be charged to the consumer.
• If the seller has not specified any carrier in the preliminary information, no cost related to the return may be demanded from the consumer.
• If the specified carrier does not have a branch in the location where the consumer resides, the seller will be obliged to collect the returned product from the consumer without demanding any additional cost.
• In distance contracts concluded through online platforms, if the information about the designated return carrier is not included in the preliminary information or if the designated carrier does not have a branch in the consumer’s location, and this omission is due to the intermediary service provider, all costs and obligations related to the return process must be borne by the intermediary service provider.

These regulations, which aim to reduce the financial burden faced by consumers when exercising their right of withdrawal and to establish a more transparent return process, stipulate that in the event the consumer exercises the right of withdrawal, the return shipping cost shall be borne by the seller or provider and shall not be charged to the consumer.

• The consumer shall be informed about the mediation process.

With the Regulation, subparagraph (k) of the first paragraph of Article 5 of the Regulation on Distance Contracts has been amended. According to this amendment, it has become mandatory to inform the consumer, before the conclusion of the distance contract or before accepting any corresponding offer, that the mediation process must be carried out as a precondition for filing a lawsuit before the Consumer Court.

• Mobile phones, smartwatches, tablets, and computers that have already been delivered are no longer excluded from the scope of the right of withdrawal; consumers are now entitled to exercise their right of withdrawal in contracts concerning these products as well.

With the Regulation, subparagraph (i) of the first paragraph of Article 15 of the Regulation on Distance Contracts has been repealed. With this amendment, contracts related to mobile phones, smartwatches, tablets, and computers that had been delivered—previously listed among the exceptions to the right of withdrawal—have been removed from this scope. As a result, consumers will now be entitled to exercise their right of withdrawal in distance sales contracts concerning these products.

Best Regards,
Balay, Eryiğit & Erten

With the Decision No. 9774 Amending the Decision on the Determination of Companies Subject to Independent Audit (“Decision No. 9774”) published in the Official Gazette dated May 1, 2025, and numbered 32887, the independent audit criteria previously determined by the Decision dated November 30, 2022, and numbered 6434 have been revised once again.

The thresholds used in determining companies subject to independent audit pursuant to Decision No. 6434 were most recently updated by the Decision No. 8313 Amending the Decision on the Determination of Companies Subject to Independent Audit, published in the Official Gazette dated April 6, 2024 (“Decision No. 8313”). With Decision No. 9774, the thresholds set out in Decision No. 8313 have been further increased, and the new thresholds are summarized below:

General Criteria for Being Subject to Independent Audit

The updated thresholds for being subject to independent audit, applicable to companies other than those listed in Annex (I) of Decision No. 6434—which are subject to independent audit regardless of any criteria—and companies considered publicly held under Capital Markets Law No. 6362, as well as those listed in Annex (II) of Decision No. 6434, are provided below.

Companies that exceed the thresholds of at least two of the three criteria above in two consecutive fiscal periods are subject to independent audit.

Companies listed in Annex (II)

Among the companies listed in Annex (II) of Decision No. 6434, those that exceed at least two of the three threshold criteria specified below for two consecutive fiscal periods shall be subject to independent audit starting from the following fiscal period. The updated thresholds for the companies listed in Annex (II) are provided below.

Companies deemed publicly traded under the Capital Markets Law

The thresholds applicable to companies whose capital market instruments are not traded on a stock exchange or other organized markets but are deemed publicly held pursuant to Capital Markets Law No. 6362 remain unchanged. Companies within this scope that exceed at least two of the three threshold criteria set forth below for two consecutive fiscal periods shall be subject to independent audit.

Decision No. 9774, which entered into force to be applied to fiscal periods starting on or after January 1, 2025, can be accessed at:https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2025/05/20250501-8.pdf.

Best Regards,
Balay, Eryiğit & Erten

The decision of the Constitutional Court (“Constitutional Court”) dated 25/12/2024 and numbered 2024/29 E. 2024/226 K. (“Decision”) was published in the Official Gazette dated 14 March 2025 and numbered 32841.

With this decision, it has been decided that the rule in paragraph (2) of Article 326 of the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (“CCP”), which is subject to objection in cases filed for non-pecuniary damages, is unconstitutional in terms of “cases for non-pecuniary damages” and should be annulled.

Two separate applications for the annulment of similar articles of law were made by two different Courts of First Instance and these applications were examined together. The applications are summarized as follows,

• In compensation cases, the judge has discretionary authority to determine the amount of compensation to be paid to the plaintiff, therefore, in the event of a partial acceptance of the lawsuit, holding the plaintiff responsible for a part of the judicial expenses in accordance with the rule, which is determined to have violated the right of personality, is incompatible with the right to protect and develop the material and spiritual existence of the person, and the rule violates the right to property and the freedom to seek rights,
• There is no fault attributable to the plaintiff in the partial rejection of the claim for non-pecuniary damages due to the lack of a method of calculating non-pecuniary damages, and the fact that the plaintiff has to pay an attorney’s fee in the partially accepted non-pecuniary damages case contradicts the principle of equity,
• In addition, the rule violates the principle of the rule of law and the fundamental aims and duties of the state, as well as the right to demand respect for private life,

It was argued that the rule is contrary to various articles of the Constitution in terms of non-pecuniary damages cases. The Constitutional Court summarized the problem of unconstitutionality by evaluating;

• that the person who files a lawsuit for non-pecuniary damages cannot be expected to foresee the amount to be awarded as compensation at the end of the lawsuit,
• the amount of non-pecuniary damages will not be possible to be determined by the information and documents entered into the file during the trial process,
• Considering that there is no special regulation regarding the trial expenses for the cases in which the amount of non-pecuniary damages is determined according to the judge’s discretion, Article 326/2 of the CCP “If either party is partially justified in the case, the court shall apportion the trial expenses according to the proportion of the parties’ justification.” should be annulled in terms of “non-pecuniary damages cases”.

Since the legal gap that will arise due to the annulment of Article 326/2 of the CCP in terms of “non-pecuniary damages cases” is deemed to violate the public interest, it has been deemed appropriate for the annulment provision to enter into force 9 months after the publication of the decision in the Official Gazette, i.e. on 14.12.2025.

The full text of the Decision is available at: https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2025/03/20250314-7.pdf

Best Regards,
Balay, Eryiğit & Erten

The Regulation Amending (“Amending Regulation”) the Regulation on Electronic Commerce Intermediary Service Providers (“ECISP”) and Electronic Commerce Service Providers (“ECSP”) was published in the Official Journal dated 08.03.2025 and numbered 32835. The important changes introduced by the Amending Regulation are presented below.

With the Amending Regulation, the second, third and fourth paragraphs of Article 5 of the Regulation on Electronic Commerce Intermediary Service Providers and Electronic Commerce Service Providers (“Regulation”) have been amended as follows:

By making the amendment as follows, the obligation of ECSP, who sells in the electronic commerce marketplace and is a merchant or tradesman and craftsman, to have a Registered Electronic Mail (“REM”) address in the area allocated to its by ECISP has been removed.

The Presidential Circular (“Circular”) No. 2025/3 on Prevention of Psychological Harassment (Mobbing) in Workplaces was published in the Official Gazette No. 32833 on March 06, 2025 and entered into force on March 06, 2025 (“Effective Date”). The important amendments are presented below for your attention.

With the Circular No. 2011/2 published in the Official Gazette No. 22879 dated March 19, 2011, the Board for Combating Psychological Harassment (the Board) was established within the Ministry of Labor and Social Security. With the Circular dated March 06, 2025, Circular No. 2011/2 was repealed. According to the Circular, the Board has been reorganized. The units that will contribute to the Board have increased this time. The composition of the Board was expanded by including the Ministry of Justice, the Human Rights and Equality Institution of Turkey, the Ombudsman’s Office, the Ethics Board for Public Officials, confederations of workers, employers and public officials, and experts and academics to be determined by the Board. With the new structure of the Board, the Ministry of Labor and Social Security’s role in combating psychological harassment has been supplemented by the Ministry of Justice and other institutions and organizations.

Employees who are subjected to psychological harassment in their workplaces will be able to submit their applications through the Labor and Social Security Communication Center (ALO 170) as in the previous regulation. The Circular also provides for the possibility to apply to the Presidential Communication Center, the Parliamentary Petitions Commission, the Human Rights and Equality Institution of Turkey and the Ombudsman’s Office. Other issues regulated by the Circular can be summarized as follows:

• Employers, managers and all employees will refrain from all actions and behaviors that may be considered as psychological harassment and that violate fundamental rights and freedoms,
• In workplaces, the fight against psychological harassment is primarily the responsibility of employers and managers. Employers and managers must develop preventive and protective policies by considering all potential risks that could be regarded as psychological harassment or arise as a result of it.
• In order to raise awareness on psychological harassment in workplaces, training and information activities will be organized and disseminated by relevant institutions and organizations, psychological harassment will be included in training programs and all employees will be informed about employee rights and application mechanisms,
• The investigation and inquiry into allegations of psychological harassment in the workplace will be conducted with utmost care and sensitivity, ensuring the protection of confidentiality and individuals’ privacy. Additionally, great attention will be paid to avoid harm to the reputation and dignity of institutions and organizations due to false allegations of psychological harassment, and the process will be carried out promptly.
• Care will be taken to include preventive and protective provisions on psychological harassment in collective labor agreements and collective agreements,
• The continued assistance of ALO 170 helpline providing support through psychologists to employees experiencing psychological harassment matters are regulated.

The Circular emphasizes that it is essential to prevent employees from being subjected to behaviors that constitute psychological harassment, which may constitute an attack on their personal rights in the workplace. The Circular aims to increase the motivation of employees, to carry out services effectively, to create a healthy, safe and peaceful working environment, to ensure inclusive and sustainable employment and to increase social welfare.

The full regulation is available at https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2025/03/20250306-5.pdf

Best Regards,
Balay, Eryiğit & Erten

The Regulation Amending the Regulation on Occupational Health and Safety Services to be Provided by the Employer or the Employer’s Representative in Workplaces  (“Regulation”), which contains important amendments regarding the occupational health and safety services and training processes of employers and employer representatives, was published in the Official Gazette dated March 5, 2025 and numbered 32832 and entered into force as of the date of publication.

Within the scope of the Regulation:

Employers and employer representatives are now allowed to carry out the duties assigned to occupational safety specialists or workplace physicians (excluding pre-employment and periodic examinations and tests) without the requirement to appoint an occupational safety specialist or workplace physician, provided that they complete the Training on the Implementation of Occupational Health and Safety Services for Employers or Employer Representatives. The requirement to pass an exam has been removed, and completing the training is now considered sufficient.

For an employer who has fewer than fifty employees and operates in the low-risk category to open a separate workplace, or for an employer representative to manage occupational health and safety services at a new workplace after the termination of an employment contract and starting work at another workplace with fewer than fifty employees in the low-risk category, it is now sufficient for the employer or employer representative to complete the training to apply via İSG-KATİP (a web application). The requirement to pass an exam has been removed.

With the Employer or Employer Representative Training Completion Certificate on the Implementation of Occupational Health and Safety Services, it was previously possible to manage the occupational health and safety services of only one workplace. However, with the amendment introduced by this Regulation;

Employers with a Certificate of Completion of Employer or Employer Representative Training on the Execution of Occupational Health and Safety Services;

• They can now undertake the occupational health and safety services of multiple workplaces within the same province, provided that the total number of employees is less than 50 and the workplaces are in the low-risk category.

Employer’s representatives who have a Certificate of Completion of Employer or Employer Representative Training on the Execution of Occupational Health and Safety Services;

• They can undertake occupational health and safety services for only one workplace where they work with a full-time service contract

Under the Regulation on the Procedures and Principles for Occupational Health and Safety Training for Employees, the occupational health and safety training to be provided to employees can now be given by employers or employer representatives who have completed the training outlined in the Regulation. The requirement to pass an exam has been removed.

While the health reports required under the Law were obtained from workplace physicians, public health service providers or family physicians; with this Regulation; Employee Health Center (ÇAŞMER), family physicians or other public health service providers can also be obtained for workplaces with less than 50 employees and less dangerous workplaces.

While the protocol made with the Ministry for the trainings in the Regulation was made by universities that are competent in providing education with the open education system and have examination centers, offices and academic counseling services in every province, with the regulation realized with this Regulation, it can be made by all universities, public institutions and organizations, professional organizations in the nature of public institutions or employee and employer organizations.

“Certificate of Completion of Employer or Employer Representative Training on the Execution of Occupational Health and Safety Services” is issued for the candidates who have completed the training by the institutions and organizations that make a protocol with the Ministry and provide training within this framework, and these institutions and organizations notify the Directorate General of these persons.

As of the date this provision entered the Regulation (March 5, 2025), candidates who have completed the training organized by institutions and organizations that have signed a protocol with the Ministry and provided training within this framework, and who have received the “Right to Participate in the Employer or Employer Representative Exam for the Implementation of Occupational Health and Safety Services” certificate, may apply by December 31, 2025, and will be issued the “Certificate of Completion of Employer or Employer Representative Training on the Execution of Occupational Health and Safety Services” by the Directorate-General

You can access the full text of the Regulation at https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2025/03/20250305-11.htm.

Best Regards,
Balay, Eryiğit & Erten

The Regulation Amending the Regulation on the Procedures and Principles of Occupational Health and Safety Trainings for Employees  (“Regulation”), which significant changes regarding the content and type of training (synchronous/asynchronous remote training), was published in the Official Gazette dated March 5, 2025, and numbered 32832. The Regulation entered into force on its publication date.

According to this Regulation:

• For public institutions classified as low-risk and private workplaces with fewer than 10 employees in the low-risk category:
• The basic training program must be tailored to the specific job. Both initial and refresher training sessions may be conducted through synchronous or asynchronous remote training methods.
• For private workplaces with 10 or more employees in the low-risk category, as well as for workplaces classified as hazardous and highly hazardous:
• The basic training program must be designed in accordance with the educational level of the participants and tailored to the specific job and workplace, incorporating elements familiar to employees and their work environment. Except for initial training sessions, refresher trainings may be conducted through synchronous remote training methods.

You can access the full text of the Communiqué, which will come into effect on July 1, 2025, at https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2025/03/20250305-10.htm.

Best Regards,
Balay, Eryiğit & Erten

The Regulation Amending the Regulation on Settlement Regarding Administrative Fines Imposed Under the Consumer Protection Law (“Regulation”), which includes provisions on the establishment and operation of settlement commissions and regulates the procedures and principles for settlement applications made under Article 77/A of the Consumer Protection Law, was published in the Official Gazette dated March 5, 2025, and numbered 32825.

In the Regulation, the words “Governorship” have been replaced with the words “Provincial Directorates of Trade”.  The works that are authorized or within the body of the Governorships have been transferred to the Provincial Directorates of Trade as a result of the regulation.

• The administrative fines listed in Article 6 of the Regulation cannot be subject to reconciliation. The phrase “administrative fines imposed by the Advertisement Board” in subparagraph (b) of this Article has been repealed.
• The phrase “Governorships” in Article 9 of the Regulation has been amended as “Provincial Directorates of Trade”.
• The second sentence of the second paragraph of Article 10 of the Regulation has been abrogated and abbreviated as “In case the reconciliation application is made to a Ministry unit other than the secretariat of the commission, the application shall be immediately forwarded to the secretariat of the commission”. The following paragraphs have been added to the same article.

“(3) The reconciliation application can also be sent by registered mail to the unit in charge of carrying out the secretariat services of the commission or the Ministry unit.

(4) In the evaluation of the application made in terms of the period within the scope of Article 11, the date of entry of the reconciliation application into the document record of the Ministry unit, and if the application is sent by registered mail, the date of mailing is taken as basis.”

• The phrase “from the General Directorate or the governorship unit” in the third paragraph of Article 13 of the Regulation has been amended as “from the relevant unit of the General Directorate or the provincial directorate of trade”, In this context, provincial directorates of Trade, not governorships, are now authorized.
• The second paragraph of Article 17 of the Regulation has been amended and the phrase “to the relevant unit of the governorship” in the fourth, fifth and sixth paragraphs has been changed as “to the Provincial Directorate of Trade”. Copies of the Minutes to be issued in the event that the reconciliation is achieved or inconclusive can now be delivered to the Provincial Directorate of Trade, not to the Governorship.
• The phrase “by the relevant unit of the governorship” in the first and second paragraphs of Article 20 of the Regulation has been amended as “by the provincial directorate of trade”.
• The term Customs has been removed from Article 26 of the Regulation and the provisions of the Regulation are now executed solely by the Ministry of Trade.

The full Regulation is available at https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2025/03/20250305-16.htm

Best Regards,
Balay, Eryiğit & Erten