A Judge May Not Dismiss the Lawsuit on Their Own Initiative
Official titleDecisions of the 2nd and 7th Civil Divisions of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay)
These Court of Cassation decisions published in the Official Gazette determine the basic procedural rules and principles that courts must follow in lawsuits concerning the correction of birth dates in population records and the elimination of co-ownership in immovable property (izale-i şuyu).
Details of the Regulation
The decision of the 2nd Civil Division of the Court of Cassation concerned the request to correct the birth date of a minor in the population record. The local court dismissed the lawsuit on the reasoning that correction of the date would correspond to the mother’s previous marriage and might therefore give rise to a problem of descent. However, the Court of Cassation emphasized that population records are subject to public order and that the judge is obliged to establish a correct register without leaving any room for doubt. It stated that correction of the birth date would not, by itself, change the person’s descent and that, therefore, in light of the existing evidence (skeletal age analyses and medical reports), the lawsuit should be accepted. The local court’s decision was accordingly reversed in favor of the law.
The decision of the 7th Civil Division, on the other hand, concerned a lawsuit for the elimination of co-ownership in an immovable property. The court had ordered the sale of the property and payment of the value of the house situated thereon to one of the co-owners. In its examination, the Court of Cassation found that all heirs on the defendant side had not been joined to the lawsuit (proper party joinder had not been ensured), that no local judicial site inspection had been carried out, and that no distribution had been made by proportioning the value of the structure (improvements) on the property to that of the building plot. Due to these procedural defects, the decision was reversed in favor of the law.
Both decisions were examined through an “appeal on points of law in favor of the law.” This legal mechanism enables the Court of Cassation to reverse decisions that have become final but are considered contrary to law, without affecting the rights of the parties, in order to prevent erroneous application in future similar cases.
Questions You Might Have
- Does changing my birth date automatically change my parentage?
- No. According to the Court of Cassation decision, correction of a birth date does not, by itself, change the child’s descent (parentage); these are two separate legal proceedings.
- Can a lawsuit for the elimination of co-ownership conclude if one of the heirs cannot be reached?
- No. Under the decision of the 7th Civil Division, all co-owners and heirs must be joined to the lawsuit (party joinder); otherwise, the decision will be reversed.
- Does a “reversal in favor of the law” annul the lawsuit I won?
- Generally, no. Reversal in favor of the law does not eliminate the legal effects of final decisions for the parties; it only prevents the erroneous application of law in the future.
Where we posted this
Follow Turkish legal developments
REGAS analyzed all 32 items in the Official Gazette of 3 September 2026; we published only 2 of them here.
REGAS summarizes every change in the Turkish Official Gazette in plain language and notifies you.
The REGAS app is currently Turkish-only. If you would like English in the app, the best way to make it happen is to support the developer: get the app and just say so.
REGAS Commentary
For citizens, these decisions convey two important messages. First, if there is an error in population records, for example, if the birth date was entered incorrectly, reservations concerning parentage must not prevent dismissal of the lawsuit; the court must investigate the facts. Second, when the sale or partition of an inherited immovable property is at issue, it is a statutory requirement that all heirs be joined to the lawsuit and that the value of the house situated on the property be calculated fairly. Decisions rendered with incomplete party joinder are legally defective.