Common Mistakes in Mandatory Mediation Applications in Turkey

Introduction

Common mistakes in mandatory mediation applications in Turkey can lead to serious procedural consequences, including dismissal of a lawsuit, loss of time, additional costs, disputes concerning the scope of the final report and, in some cases, difficulty protecting limitation or forfeiture periods.

Mandatory mediation is not merely an informal settlement meeting. It is a legally regulated pre-litigation procedure that must be completed before filing certain types of lawsuits in Turkey. The process applies in areas such as employment disputes, qualifying commercial disputes, consumer disputes and certain disputes concerning leases, co-ownership, condominium law and neighbouring rights.

The Ministry of Justice explains that mandatory mediation first became a condition of action for qualifying employment disputes as of 1 January 2018. It subsequently became applicable to covered commercial monetary claims and consumer court disputes. Its scope was later expanded by legislative amendments.

The purpose of mandatory mediation is to provide the parties with a genuine opportunity to resolve the dispute before commencing formal litigation. However, many applications are prepared as though the procedure were only a technical formality. Applicants may submit incomplete party information, define the dispute too narrowly, apply to the wrong mediation office, fail to include connected claims or attend the meeting through a representative who does not have sufficient authority.

Mistakes may also occur after the mediator is appointed. A party may ignore the invitation, fail to prepare the relevant calculation, sign an overly broad settlement agreement or file a lawsuit concerning claims that were not properly included in the mediation process.

This article explains the most common mistakes in mandatory mediation applications in Turkey and provides practical guidance for employees, employers, companies, consumers, landlords, tenants, shareholders, insurers and foreign parties.

What Is Mandatory Mediation in Turkey?

Mandatory mediation, also known as mediation as a condition of action, means that the claimant must apply to mediation before filing a lawsuit falling within a legally defined category.

The obligation is to apply to and complete the mediation procedure. It is not an obligation to reach a settlement.

The parties remain free to:

• Accept or reject settlement proposals;
• End negotiations;
• Continue the process;
• Request private sessions;
• Proceed to court if no agreement is reached.

The mediator does not issue a judgment and does not decide which party is legally right. The mediator manages the negotiation process and assists the parties in exploring possible solutions.

Under Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes, mandatory mediation applies where another law expressly makes mediation a condition of action. The claimant must complete the process and submit the final non-agreement record when filing the subsequent lawsuit.

Main Areas of Mandatory Mediation

Mandatory mediation currently applies to several important categories of private-law disputes.

Employment Disputes

Mandatory mediation generally applies to lawsuits concerning employee or employer receivables and compensation arising from individual or collective employment contracts, as well as reinstatement claims, subject to statutory exceptions. The system has applied to qualifying employment disputes since 1 January 2018.

Commercial Disputes

Under Article 5/A of the Turkish Commercial Code, mandatory mediation applies to specified commercial lawsuits concerning monetary claims. Legislative amendments have clarified that qualifying actions for annulment of objection, negative declaratory relief and restitution may also fall within the mandatory commercial mediation framework where their subject is a monetary claim.

Consumer Disputes

Consumer disputes that must be filed before consumer courts are generally subject to mandatory mediation, subject to statutory exceptions and the separate jurisdiction of Consumer Arbitration Committees.

Lease, Co-Ownership and Neighbour Disputes

As of 1 September 2023, mandatory mediation was expanded to include, among other matters:

• Disputes arising from lease relationships, except specified enforcement-based eviction procedures;
• Division of movable and immovable property;
• Dissolution of co-ownership;
• Condominium disputes;
• Neighbouring-right disputes.

Because the legal scope has expanded over time, applicants should never rely on an outdated checklist. The applicable legislation should be reviewed as of the intended application date.

Mistake 1: Assuming Every Dispute Is Subject to Mandatory Mediation

One of the most common mistakes is assuming that all private disputes must first go through mandatory mediation.

Mandatory mediation exists only where legislation expressly requires it.

Some claims may be:

• Suitable for voluntary mediation but not mandatory mediation;
• Subject to an administrative application;
• Within the jurisdiction of an arbitration committee;
• Required to be filed through enforcement proceedings;
• Outside the scope of private-law mediation;
• Subject to a special court or authority.

For example, a low-value consumer claim may fall within Consumer Arbitration Committee jurisdiction instead of consumer court mediation. A public hospital liability claim may require administrative-law procedures. A criminal complaint cannot be replaced by private mediation unless the matter falls under a separate criminal-law reconciliation framework.

Before applying, the claimant should determine:

1. The legal nature of the relationship;
2. The competent court or authority;
3. The remedy requested;
4. Whether legislation expressly requires mediation;
5. Whether a statutory exception exists.

An unnecessary mandatory mediation application may not satisfy the actual procedural requirement and may cause loss of time.

Mistake 2: Failing to Recognise a Dispute That Is Subject to Mandatory Mediation

The opposite mistake is filing a lawsuit directly without completing mediation where mediation is a condition of action.

This may occur because the claimant:

• Uses the wrong legal classification;
• Treats a commercial claim as an ordinary civil claim;
• Overlooks a connected monetary request;
• Relies on outdated legislation;
• Assumes that urgency eliminates the condition of action;
• Believes that prior informal negotiations are sufficient.

A court may examine whether the mandatory mediation requirement was fulfilled. If the claimant fails to submit the final report according to the applicable procedure, the lawsuit may face procedural consequences.

Informal negotiations, correspondence, settlement meetings or a private telephone call do not automatically replace the official mandatory mediation procedure.

Mistake 3: Applying to the Wrong Mediation Office

Applications must be submitted to the mediation office located in the jurisdiction of the court that would have territorial competence for the dispute. Where no separate mediation office exists, the application is made to the designated court registry. The Ministry of Justice’s official training materials explain this territorial structure.

Applicants may mistakenly apply:

• Where they personally live;
• Where their lawyer’s office is located;
• Where the contract was signed, without checking jurisdiction;
• Where the company headquarters appears to be located, although another rule applies;
• To a courthouse having no territorial connection with the dispute.

The competent mediation office may depend on:

• Defendant’s residence or registered office;
• Place of performance;
• Workplace location;
• Property location;
• Consumer’s residence;
• Special jurisdiction rules;
• Contractual jurisdiction clauses, where legally valid.

An incorrect application may generate a territorial objection and procedural delay.

The claimant should analyse court jurisdiction before filing the mediation application, not after the mediator has already been appointed.

Mistake 4: Providing Incorrect or Incomplete Party Information

The mediation office and mediator must be able to identify and contact the parties.

Common errors include:

• Misspelled company names;
• Use of a commercial brand instead of the legal entity;
• Missing Turkish identity number;
• Incorrect tax number;
• Old registered address;
• Missing telephone number;
• Incorrect email address;
• Naming a branch instead of the employer company;
• Naming a former company after a merger or title change.

The applicant should distinguish carefully between:

• Brand;
• Branch;
• Franchisee;
• Group company;
• Parent company;
• Subsidiary;
• Actual employer;
• Contracting company;
• Insurer;
• Public authority.

The company appearing on signage may not be the legal contractual party.

Trade registry records, invoices, employment documents, tax records and contracts should be reviewed before the application.

The official process relies heavily on the information supplied by the applicant. Although the mediator may conduct additional research where necessary, the applicant should not shift the entire burden of identifying the opposing party to the mediator. The Ministry’s training materials state that the mediator receives party contact information from the mediation office and may conduct further research if needed.

Mistake 5: Failing to Include All Necessary Parties

A dispute may involve more than one defendant or responsible party.

Examples include:

• Employer and subcontractor;
• Main contractor and subcontractor;
• Seller and marketplace;
• Hospital and insurer;
• Carrier and freight forwarder;
• Landlord and property owner;
• Company and guarantor;
• Several co-owners;
• Multiple heirs;
• Joint debtors.

If only one party is included in the application, the later lawsuit against another party may create an argument that mandatory mediation was not completed in relation to that defendant.

The applicant should identify whether liability is:

• Joint;
• Several;
• Contractual;
• Tort-based;
• Based on guarantee;
• Based on insurance;
• Based on employer-subcontractor responsibility.

It is not always necessary to include every person connected to the facts. However, each person against whom a later claim may be filed should be assessed before the application.

Mistake 6: Naming Persons Who Are Not Legally Responsible

Over-inclusion can also create problems.

Applicants sometimes name:

• Company employees;
• Store managers;
• Human resources staff;
• Accounting personnel;
• Lawyers;
• Family members;
• Shareholders;
• Directors

even where no personal claim exists against them.

This may complicate the process, create unnecessary confidentiality risks and reduce the likelihood of settlement.

The application should identify the parties based on the legal claim, not merely because they were involved in communications.

A company manager is not automatically personally liable for the company’s contractual debt. A shareholder is not automatically responsible for the obligations of a limited liability company or joint-stock company. A human resources employee is not the employer merely because they signed a notice.

Mistake 7: Defining the Dispute Too Narrowly

The description of the dispute is one of the most important parts of the application.

A claimant may write only:

• “Employment receivables”;
• “Commercial receivable”;
• “Rent dispute”;
• “Compensation”;
• “Consumer dispute.”

Such descriptions may be too vague to establish clearly which claims were included.

In employment mediation, the claimant may have claims for:

• Severance pay;
• Notice pay;
• Overtime;
• Annual leave;
• Weekly rest;
• Public holiday pay;
• Wage balance;
• Bonus;
• Commission;
• Discrimination compensation;
• Reinstatement.

In a commercial dispute, the claimant may seek:

• Principal debt;
• Interest;
• Contractual penalty;
• Compensation;
• Annulment of enforcement objection;
• Restitution;
• Negative declaration.

The application should describe the dispute broadly enough to cover the intended lawsuit but specifically enough to identify the actual subject.

Mistake 8: Defining the Dispute Too Broadly

Applicants sometimes use extremely broad wording such as:

All present and future claims arising from every legal relationship between the parties.

This may create uncertainty and may include matters that were never discussed or legally mature.

A mediation application should not become an unlimited waiver document.

The subject should be linked to:

• Contract;
• Employment relationship;
• Property;
• Invoice;
• Incident;
• Enforcement file;
• Lease period;
• Identified transaction.

Broad wording may also create later disputes over whether an unrelated claim was included in the settlement.

Mistake 9: Omitting Connected Claims

A claimant may include the principal debt but omit related claims such as:

• Interest;
• Contractual penalty;
• Collection costs;
• Compensation;
• Return of security deposit;
• Rent difference;
• Value loss;
• Loss of use;
• Unpaid bonus;
• Insurance deductible;
• Annulment of objection.

If the later lawsuit includes omitted claims, the defendant may argue that the mandatory mediation condition was not completed for those claims.

Connected remedies should be identified at the application stage.

This does not require the claimant to know the final expert calculation. The claimant may state that the amount will be determined through accounting, expert review or an unquantified claim mechanism where legally appropriate.

Mistake 10: Ignoring the Difference Between Monetary and Non-Monetary Claims

A dispute may contain both monetary and non-monetary remedies.

For example, a commercial dispute may involve:

• Payment of damages;
• Cessation of trademark use;
• Delivery of goods;
• Return of documents;
• Annulment of a corporate resolution.

A lease dispute may involve:

• Rent receivables;
• Eviction;
• Deposit;
• Repair costs.

An employment dispute may involve:

• Reinstatement;
• Compensation;
• Wages.

The applicant should determine which claims fall within mandatory mediation and how they relate to other remedies.

Treating the entire dispute as purely monetary may omit essential non-monetary issues. Treating it as purely non-monetary may cause the applicant to overlook the mandatory mediation requirement for the payment claims.

Mistake 11: Failing to Identify the Correct Legal Relationship

The same facts may be classified differently.

A relationship may be:

• Employment;
• Consultancy;
• Agency;
• Distribution;
• Consumer transaction;
• Commercial sale;
• Lease;
• Service contract;
• Partnership;
• Insurance.

The legal classification affects:

• Mandatory mediation category;
• Competent court;
• Applicable limitation;
• Burden of proof;
• Responsible parties.

For example, a person described in a contract as an “independent consultant” may argue that they were actually an employee. A residential rental may differ from a commercial lease. A passenger may be a consumer, while a transport company may be involved in a commercial relationship.

The application should not rely solely on the contract title.

Mistake 12: Waiting Until the Last Day

Applicants sometimes delay until the limitation or forfeiture period is close to expiry.

This creates risks concerning:

• Application date;
• Incorrect office;
• Missing party details;
• Need to add parties;
• Technical failure;
• Special statutory deadlines;
• Subsequent filing period.

Law No. 6325 contains rules concerning the effect of mediation on limitation and forfeiture periods. However, applicants should not assume that every deadline is suspended in the same way or that a defective application will protect all claims.

Special deadlines may apply to:

• Reinstatement claims;
• Corporate resolution challenges;
• Insurance notices;
• Arbitration;
• Enforcement objections;
• Administrative applications;
• TÜRKPATENT proceedings.

A mandatory mediation application should be filed early enough to correct possible errors.

Mistake 13: Assuming Mediation Suspends Every Deadline

Mediation may affect certain limitation and forfeiture periods under the statutory rules, but it does not suspend every procedural, administrative or contractual deadline.

The claimant may still need to protect:

• Appeal periods;
• Arbitration filing periods;
• Enforcement deadlines;
• Administrative objection periods;
• Registry deadlines;
• Trademark opposition periods;
• Contractual notice periods;
• Insurance notification periods.

A party should prepare a separate deadline chart.

The sentence “we applied to mediation, therefore every period stopped” is legally dangerous.

Mistake 14: Treating Informal Settlement Negotiations as Mandatory Mediation

Parties may have exchanged:

• Emails;
• WhatsApp messages;
• Settlement proposals;
• Lawyer correspondence;
• Payment plans;
• Meeting minutes.

These communications may be valuable but do not automatically satisfy the statutory condition of action.

Mandatory mediation requires the formal procedure established by law, including appointment of a registered mediator and preparation of the appropriate final report.

The Ministry of Justice provides specific templates for mandatory mediation, including first-meeting records, agreement records and non-agreement records.

Mistake 15: Failing to Submit Important Documents to the Mediator

Mediation is not formal litigation, and the mediator does not issue a judgment. However, meaningful settlement frequently requires basic documents.

Relevant documents may include:

• Employment contract;
• Payroll;
• Termination notice;
• Invoice;
• Account statement;
• Lease agreement;
• Payment receipts;
• Enforcement file;
• Insurance policy;
• Expert report;
• Title deed;
• Company records.

A party attending without any documents may be unable to explain the claim or obtain authority for a realistic settlement.

The Ministry of Justice’s renewal-training materials emphasise that the parties should be prepared for the first meeting and bring the relevant information and documents.

The objective is not to conduct a full evidentiary trial. It is to provide sufficient information for informed negotiation.

Mistake 16: Submitting Confidential Documents Without Protection

The opposite mistake is sending highly sensitive documents without considering:

• Redaction;
• Personal data;
• Trade secrets;
• Medical information;
• Customer information;
• Bank details;
• Internal pricing.

Mediation is confidential, but parties should still use proportionate information-sharing methods.

Possible precautions include:

• Redacted copies;
• Limited-access data rooms;
• Lawyer-only disclosure;
• Expert review;
• Confidentiality protocols;
• Secure electronic transfer.

A party should not circulate unrelated personal data merely because a mediation file exists.

Mistake 17: Failing to Verify the Representative’s Authority

A company or individual may participate through a lawyer or another representative.

The representative must have sufficient authority for the intended acts.

Authority may be needed to:

• Attend;
• Negotiate;
• Accept payment;
• Acknowledge debt;
• Release claims;
• Withdraw proceedings;
• Sign a settlement;
• Transfer property;
• Bind a company.

A general power of attorney may not always be sufficient for every substantive transaction.

Corporate representatives should provide:

• Signature circular;
• Trade registry records;
• Board resolution;
• Internal authorisation;
• Power of attorney.

A mediation agreement signed by an unauthorised person may later be challenged.

Mistake 18: Sending a Representative With No Settlement Authority

A person may have authority to attend but no meaningful authority to negotiate.

This frequently happens when a company sends:

• Junior employee;
• Human resources assistant;
• Local branch manager;
• External lawyer without instructions;
• Claims handler without approval authority.

The representative may repeat:

I have no authority to make any offer.

This reduces mediation to a formality.

The Ministry of Justice’s training materials emphasise the importance of genuine communication and criticise processes in which mediation is reduced to asking whether the parties intend to settle without conducting meaningful negotiations.

Where board, insurer or head-office approval is required, the representative should disclose:

• Current authority limit;
• Approval body;
• Expected timetable;
• Conditions of approval.

Mistake 19: Ignoring the First Meeting Invitation

A party may ignore calls or messages because it believes that attendance is unnecessary.

This can have cost consequences in later litigation where the first meeting is not attended without a valid excuse, depending on the applicable legal regime and court assessment.

The mediator must document invitations and attendance accurately. The Ministry’s training materials state that the mediator must inform and invite the parties through available communication methods and record these actions.

A party that cannot attend should:

• Respond promptly;
• Explain the obstacle;
• Request another date;
• Appoint a representative;
• Preserve evidence of a valid excuse.

Silence is rarely the best strategy.

Mistake 20: Assuming Attendance Means Settlement Is Mandatory

Some parties refuse to attend because they believe the mediator can force them to pay or settle.

This is incorrect.

Mandatory mediation requires application and procedural participation where the law applies. Settlement remains voluntary.

The mediator is not a judge and does not impose a decision.

A party may attend, explain its position and decide that no settlement is possible.

Understanding this distinction may increase meaningful participation.

Mistake 21: Attending Without Preparing a Claim Calculation

A claimant demanding payment should prepare a clear calculation.

The calculation should identify, where applicable:

• Principal;
• Due date;
• Interest type;
• Interest start date;
• Payments;
• Deductions;
• Taxes;
• Contractual penalty;
• Expenses;
• Net settlement request.

Employment claims may require separate calculations for each receivable.

Commercial claims may require reconciliation of multiple invoices, returns, credit notes and prior payments.

An unexplained lump-sum demand may appear arbitrary and reduce the chance of settlement.

Mistake 22: Using an Unrealistic or Fabricated Claim Amount

Negotiation permits strong opening positions. However, a demand should have a legal or commercial basis.

Problems arise where the claimant:

• Ignores prior payments;
• Includes unrelated debts;
• Uses an incorrect interest rate knowingly;
• Multiplies the same loss;
• Claims items already settled;
• Presents a false invoice;
• Includes future damage without explanation.

A high claim is not automatically bad faith. A knowingly false calculation may create serious credibility and legal problems.

Mistake 23: Failing to Consider Non-Monetary Settlement Options

Parties often treat mediation only as a negotiation over money.

However, settlement may include:

• Payment plan;
• Return of goods;
• Replacement;
• Repair;
• Reinstatement;
• Reference letter;
• Confidentiality;
• Vacating date;
• Transfer of shares;
• Release of guarantee;
• Withdrawal of enforcement;
• Continued commercial relationship.

A landlord and tenant may agree on a future vacating date instead of immediate eviction. A supplier may replace defective goods. An employer may issue an agreed employment certificate. A company may restructure payment rather than face enforcement.

Ignoring these options may cause a potentially solvable dispute to fail.

Mistake 24: Failing to Include Interest and Costs in the Settlement

A settlement amount may be agreed without clarifying whether it includes:

• Accrued interest;
• Future interest;
• Lawyer fees;
• Mediation fees;
• Court costs;
• Enforcement costs;
• Taxes;
• Bank charges.

This can create a new dispute after the settlement.

The agreement should state clearly whether the amount is:

• Gross or net;
• Inclusive of interest;
• Inclusive of costs;
• Subject to withholding;
• Payable in Turkish lira or foreign currency.

Mistake 25: Signing an Overly Broad Release

A common and serious mistake is signing a settlement containing a release wider than the actual dispute.

The document may state that the party releases:

• All existing claims;
• All future claims;
• All group companies;
• All employees and directors;
• All known and unknown damage;
• Every transaction between the parties.

This may unintentionally waive unrelated claims.

The release should be limited to:

• Specific employment period;
• Identified contract;
• Identified invoice;
• Identified incident;
• Identified lease;
• Identified enforcement file;
• Clearly listed receivables.

The parties should distinguish between full and partial settlement.

Mistake 26: Failing to Identify Partial Settlement Correctly

A dispute may be resolved only in part.

For example:

• Principal is agreed but interest remains disputed;
• Severance is agreed but overtime is not;
• Rent is paid but eviction remains unresolved;
• Damages are agreed but insurance contribution remains open.

The final document should state:

• Which claims are settled;
• Which claims remain unresolved;
• Which parties are released;
• Which rights are reserved.

A partial settlement should not contain a contradictory clause stating that all possible claims have been released.

Mistake 27: Using Vague Payment Terms

A settlement should not state merely:

• “Payment will be made later.”
• “The debtor will pay when possible.”
• “The amount will be paid in instalments.”
• “The parties will agree on a date.”

The agreement should identify:

• Exact amount;
• Currency;
• Bank account;
• Payment date;
• Instalment schedule;
• Interest;
• Grace period;
• Default consequences;
• Security.

Clarity is essential because a valid mediation agreement may become enforceable under Law No. 6325.

Mistake 28: Releasing Claims Before Receiving Payment

Where payment is deferred, an immediate unconditional release may expose the creditor.

A safer structure may provide:

• Release after full payment;
• Partial release after each instalment;
• Suspension rather than withdrawal of enforcement;
• Retention of security until completion;
• Acceleration after default.

The agreement should determine what happens if the debtor fails to pay.

It should also state whether the creditor may enforce:

• The original claim;
• The settlement amount;
• Remaining instalments;
• Interest and costs.

Mistake 29: Failing to Obtain Security

A debtor may request a long instalment plan.

The creditor should consider security such as:

• Bank guarantee;
• Mortgage;
• Pledge;
• Guarantor;
• Aval;
• Escrow;
• Retention of attachment;
• Post-dated payment instruments, subject to legal review.

A settlement without security may be commercially weak even if legally enforceable.

The debtor’s asset position should be considered before accepting long-term payment.

Mistake 30: Withdrawing Lawsuits or Enforcement Proceedings Too Early

A party may agree to withdraw:

• Lawsuit;
• Enforcement proceeding;
• Objection;
• Attachment;
• Preliminary injunction;
• Complaint.

The withdrawal should usually be coordinated with performance.

A creditor should not automatically lift all security before receiving payment.

The agreement should state:

• Which file will be withdrawn;
• Who will file the document;
• On what date;
• Whether withdrawal is conditional;
• Who pays costs;
• Whether attachments remain until payment.

Mistake 31: Failing to Read the Final Report

The final report is not a minor administrative document.

It may state:

• Agreement;
• Partial agreement;
• Non-agreement;
• Non-attendance;
• Scope of dispute;
• Parties;
• Meeting date.

The parties and lawyers should review:

• Names;
• Identity numbers;
• Company titles;
• Claim description;
• Attendance;
• Scope;
• Outcome.

An incorrect report may create problems in the subsequent lawsuit.

The Ministry of Justice publishes official templates for mandatory mediation agreement and non-agreement records.

Mistake 32: Filing the Lawsuit Before the Mediation Process Is Properly Completed

A claimant may file immediately after the first meeting even though:

• The process is still open;
• The final report has not been prepared;
• Additional parties are being contacted;
• A settlement approval is pending;
• The mediator’s assignment period has not ended.

The claimant should confirm that the process has formally concluded and obtain the correct final document.

A verbal statement that “we could not agree” is not sufficient.

Mistake 33: Filing Claims Beyond the Scope of the Final Report

After non-agreement, the claimant may file a broader lawsuit than the dispute addressed in mediation.

This creates a potential procedural objection.

The application and final report should be compared with the intended petition.

Before filing, counsel should prepare a table showing:

• Mediation claim;
• Defendant;
• Legal basis;
• Intended lawsuit claim;
• Amount;
• Remedy.

Any significant difference should be analysed.

Mistake 34: Failing to Attach or Refer to the Final Report Correctly

The claimant must comply with the procedural rules concerning submission of the final non-agreement report.

The court may request completion where the report is missing under the applicable statutory procedure. Failure to cure may produce dismissal consequences.

The claimant should verify:

• Correct report;
• Correct file;
• Correct parties;
• Legible copy;
• Electronic system record;
• Agreement or non-agreement status.

Mistake 35: Confusing the Final Report With the Settlement Agreement

The final report and settlement agreement are different documents.

The final report records how the process ended.

The settlement agreement contains the substantive obligations.

A final report stating “agreement was reached” may be insufficient by itself to establish:

• Amount;
• Payment date;
• Eviction date;
• Delivery obligation;
• Release;
• Default.

The settlement terms should be drafted separately or incorporated clearly.

Mistake 36: Assuming Every Settlement Is Automatically Enforceable

Law No. 6325 regulates when a mediation settlement may have the effect of an enforceable judgment-equivalent document and when an enforceability annotation may be required.

Enforceability may depend on:

• Signatures;
• Participation of lawyers;
• Nature of dispute;
• Legal formalities;
• Subject matter.

A settlement concerning:

• Real estate transfer;
• Company shares;
• Registered rights;
• Mortgage;
• Third-party obligations

may require additional formal procedures.

The mediation document does not eliminate land registry, trade registry, notarial or corporate requirements.

Mistake 37: Failing to Consider Tax and Social Security Consequences

Settlement payments may have tax, withholding, social security or accounting consequences.

Examples include:

• Employment receivables;
• Compensation;
• Interest;
• Commercial debt;
• Rent;
• Share transfer;
• Refund;
• Attorney fees.

The agreement should identify:

• Gross or net payment;
• Withholding responsibility;
• VAT treatment;
• Invoice requirement;
• Social security reporting;
• Stamp tax issues;
• Tax document timing.

A net figure without tax language may create a dispute at payment.

Mistake 38: Ignoring Foreign Currency Issues

Commercial and international disputes may involve:

• Euro;
• US dollars;
• British pounds;
• Other currencies.

The agreement should state:

• Payment currency;
• Whether payment may be made in Turkish lira;
• Exchange-rate source;
• Exchange-rate date;
• Bank charges;
• Correspondent-bank costs;
• Interest currency.

A clause stating only “the equivalent amount will be paid” is incomplete.

Mistake 39: Failing to Protect Foreign Parties

Foreign parties may require:

• Interpreter;
• Bilingual agreement;
• Apostilled power of attorney;
• Sworn translation;
• Corporate authority documents;
• Online participation;
• International bank details.

The controlling language should be stated.

The foreign party should understand:

• Scope of release;
• Enforcement effect;
• Payment;
• Applicable law;
• Turkish procedural consequences.

A translation prepared only after signature may reveal inconsistencies too late.

Mistake 40: Treating Online Mediation Casually

Online mediation is legally and practically useful, but it requires safeguards.

The mediator and parties should verify:

• Identity;
• Authority;
• Confidentiality;
• No unauthorised listener;
• No secret recording;
• Access to full document;
• Valid electronic signature method;
• Secure document transmission.

A person appearing on a video call should not automatically be assumed to have authority to bind a company.

Mistake 41: Secretly Recording the Meeting

Secret recording may violate confidentiality, personal data rules and the legitimate expectations of participants.

Mediation is designed to encourage open settlement communication.

Participants should not record:

• Joint sessions;
• Private sessions;
• Screen shares;
• Telephone discussions;
• Interpreter communications

without a valid legal basis and informed permission.

A confidentiality breach may also destroy settlement prospects and create separate liability.

Mistake 42: Using Mediation to Collect Evidence

Mandatory mediation should not be used as a disguised discovery procedure.

A party should not apply solely to:

• Obtain admissions;
• Identify witnesses;
• Learn settlement limits;
• Access trade secrets;
• Create a secret recording;
• Obtain internal company documents.

Law No. 6325 restricts the use of specified mediation offers, statements and documents in later litigation or arbitration. Pre-existing evidence does not become inadmissible merely because it was shown during mediation.

Mistake 43: Assuming the Mediator Is the Party’s Lawyer

The mediator is neutral.

The mediator does not:

• Represent the claimant;
• Calculate every claim as counsel;
• Protect one party’s limitation periods;
• Decide legal strategy;
• Guarantee enforceability;
• Advise one side privately.

Parties should obtain independent legal advice, especially where the dispute concerns:

• High-value claims;
• Employment releases;
• Real estate;
• Share transfer;
• Bodily injury;
• Foreign parties;
• Tax;
• Long-term instalments.

Mistake 44: Expecting the Mediator to Decide the Case

Some parties attend expecting the mediator to declare who is right.

The mediator may help test legal and commercial risks but does not issue a binding decision.

A party should prepare for negotiation, not trial.

Evidence and legal arguments remain important because they affect settlement assessment, but the goal is not to persuade the mediator to rule against the other party.

Mistake 45: Reducing Mediation to a Telephone Formality

The Ministry of Justice’s renewal-training materials expressly criticise the view that mandatory mediation is merely a telephone call asking whether the parties intend to settle. The materials emphasise that the mediator should use genuine communication and negotiation techniques before preparing the final report.

Parties should also resist treating the process as meaningless.

A short initial call may be appropriate for scheduling, but a real dispute should be evaluated through a meaningful meeting or communication process.

Mistake 46: Failing to Consider Settlement Implementation

A settlement may look acceptable but be impossible to perform.

Before signing, the parties should consider:

• Does the debtor have liquidity?
• Is corporate approval available?
• Is third-party consent needed?
• Can the property be transferred?
• Is the bank willing to release the guarantee?
• Is the product available?
• Is the vacating date realistic?
• Can the tax documents be issued?

An agreement should not depend on an action outside the parties’ control without addressing the consequence of failure.

Mistake 47: Binding Third Parties Without Their Participation

A settlement cannot automatically bind:

• Bank;
• Insurer;
• Guarantor;
• Shareholder;
• Affiliate;
• Public authority;
• Family member;
• Co-owner

unless that person participates or valid authority exists.

For example:

• A company cannot promise that the bank will release a mortgage;
• An insured cannot guarantee that the insurer will pay;
• One heir cannot release another heir’s claim;
• A shareholder cannot bind the company without authority.

Third-party conditions should be stated as obligations to seek consent, not as guaranteed outcomes unless the third party signs.

Mistake 48: Ignoring Existing Arbitration or Jurisdiction Clauses

A commercial contract may contain:

• Arbitration clause;
• Foreign court clause;
• Multi-tier negotiation clause;
• Contractual mediation clause.

Statutory mandatory mediation may still need to be considered depending on the legal framework and intended proceeding.

The party should analyse:

• Whether Turkish mandatory mediation applies;
• Whether arbitration remains the final forum;
• Whether contractual mediation was also required;
• Whether urgent interim measures are needed;
• Whether arbitration limitation periods continue.

A courthouse mediation application should not be assumed to modify an arbitration agreement.

Mistake 49: Failing to Coordinate Several Related Disputes

The same relationship may involve:

• Enforcement proceeding;
• Negative declaratory action;
• Compensation claim;
• Contract termination;
• Return of goods;
• Criminal complaint;
• Administrative application.

The mediation application should be coordinated with the entire dispute strategy.

A settlement in one file may affect another.

For example, payment of a commercial debt may require withdrawal of the enforcement objection. Settlement of an employment claim may affect a pending reinstatement action. Resolution of a lease dispute may require both payment and a vacating schedule.

Mistake 50: Filing Without Professional Review in a Complex Case

The application form may appear simple, but the legal consequences are not.

Professional review is especially important where:

• Several defendants exist;
• Claims are mixed;
• Limitation is near;
• Foreign parties are involved;
• Arbitration exists;
• Real estate is concerned;
• Insurance applies;
• Share transfers are negotiated;
• The settlement will be paid in instalments;
• Significant releases are requested.

A lawyer can ensure that the mediation scope matches the intended lawsuit and that the settlement does not create unintended waivers.

Practical Checklist Before Filing a Mandatory Mediation Application

Before applying, the claimant should confirm:

• Is mediation legally mandatory?
• What is the correct dispute category?
• Which court would have jurisdiction?
• Which mediation office is competent?
• What is the exact legal entity of each party?
• Are all potential defendants included?
• What claims will be filed later?
• Are monetary and non-monetary remedies separated?
• Are interest and connected claims included?
• Are limitation and forfeiture periods protected?
• Are arbitration or special procedures relevant?
• Are contact details current?
• Are essential documents ready?
• Does the representative have authority?

Practical Checklist Before the First Meeting

The parties should prepare:

• Chronology;
• Contract;
• Claim calculation;
• Payment history;
• Evidence summary;
• Settlement objective;
• Authority documents;
• Approval requirements;
• Non-monetary options;
• Security proposals;
• Tax analysis;
• Deadline analysis.

The representative should know:

• The legal position;
• The commercial objective;
• Maximum authority;
• Whether approval is conditional;
• Which terms are unacceptable.

Practical Checklist Before Signing a Settlement

Before signing, confirm:

• Correct parties;
• Correct legal names;
• Clear scope;
• Full or partial settlement;
• Exact payment amount;
• Currency;
• Due date;
• Interest;
• Instalments;
• Security;
• Tax;
• Performance sequence;
• Release conditions;
• Pending proceedings;
• Withdrawal timing;
• Confidentiality;
• Default;
• Enforceability;
• Third-party formalities.

Frequently Asked Questions

What happens if mandatory mediation is not completed before filing a lawsuit?

The lawsuit may face procedural consequences because mediation is a condition of action for covered disputes. The claimant must comply with the applicable final-report procedure.

Can an application be made to any courthouse?

No. The application should be made to the mediation office in the jurisdiction of the court that would be territorially competent, or to the designated court registry where no mediation office exists.

Must every claim be written separately?

The application should identify the claims sufficiently clearly. Connected receivables and remedies should not be omitted.

Can additional parties be added later?

This may be possible during the process in appropriate circumstances, but relying on later correction is risky. Potential defendants should be identified from the beginning.

Does mandatory mediation require settlement?

No. It requires completion of the procedure, not acceptance of a settlement.

What happens if a party does not attend?

Unjustified non-attendance at the first meeting may have litigation-cost consequences under the applicable law. The court determines the final effect.

Can a lawyer attend instead of the party?

Yes, where the lawyer has legally sufficient authority. The power of attorney should be reviewed.

Can a company employee attend?

Yes, if the legal framework permits and the employee has sufficient representation and negotiation authority. Company signature rules must be checked.

Should interest be included in the application?

Where interest will be claimed in the lawsuit, it should be addressed in the mediation scope.

Can the parties settle only part of the dispute?

Yes. The document should identify the settled and unresolved claims clearly.

Can a mediation agreement be enforced?

A valid and sufficiently precise settlement may become enforceable under Law No. 6325, subject to the applicable signature and formal requirements.

Does mediation transfer real estate automatically?

No. Land registry and other statutory formalities remain necessary.

Does mediation suspend every deadline?

No. Special court, administrative, arbitration, enforcement and contractual periods must be reviewed separately.

Can the meeting be conducted online?

Yes, provided that identity, authority, confidentiality and valid signature requirements are protected.

Is the mediator responsible for calculating the claim?

No. The mediator is neutral and does not replace the claimant’s lawyer or financial expert.

Conclusion

Common mistakes in mandatory mediation applications in Turkey usually arise because the procedure is treated as a simple administrative formality rather than an important stage of dispute resolution.

The most serious mistakes include:

• Applying to the wrong mediation office;
• Naming the wrong legal entity;
• Omitting necessary parties;
• Defining the dispute too narrowly;
• Failing to include connected claims;
• Ignoring limitation periods;
• Attending without authority;
• Failing to prepare calculations;
• Signing broad releases;
• Using vague payment terms;
• Withdrawing legal protection before performance;
• Filing a lawsuit outside the mediation scope.

Mandatory mediation requires only an attempt to resolve the dispute, not compulsory settlement. However, the application must be prepared carefully because the parties, claims and final report may affect the admissibility and scope of the later lawsuit.

Applicants should first identify the correct legal relationship and competent authority. Employment, commercial, consumer, lease, co-ownership, condominium and neighbour disputes have different statutory frameworks.

The Ministry of Justice confirms that applications are made through mediation offices or designated court registries and that mediators are appointed through the official system.

The claimant should provide accurate party information and should not rely on a trade name, branch or brand where a separate legal company is responsible.

The scope of the dispute should match the intended lawsuit. Principal debt, interest, compensation, contractual penalty, restitution and other connected claims should be analysed separately.

Parties should attend through representatives who understand the dispute and have meaningful negotiation authority. Sending an uninformed or unauthorised representative reduces the process to a formality and may prevent settlement.

The final report should be checked carefully. Agreement, partial agreement, non-agreement and non-attendance must be recorded accurately. The Ministry of Justice provides standard templates for mandatory mediation reports and first-meeting documents.

A settlement agreement should identify:

• Parties;
• Claims;
• Amount;
• Payment date;
• Currency;
• Instalments;
• Interest;
• Security;
• Releases;
• Pending proceedings;
• Default;
• Enforceability.

Where performance will occur later, releases and withdrawal of proceedings should usually be conditional on actual performance.

Mediation should also be coordinated with limitation, arbitration, enforcement, administrative and contractual deadlines. The existence of a mediation file does not automatically suspend every legal period.

Foreign parties should pay particular attention to translation, power of attorney, corporate authority, payment currency and cross-border enforcement.

A properly prepared mandatory mediation application may resolve the dispute quickly or, if no agreement is reached, provide a sound procedural basis for the subsequent lawsuit. A defective application may instead create an additional dispute before the merits of the original claim are even examined.

An experienced Turkish mandatory mediation lawyer can identify the correct parties, define the claim scope, protect legal deadlines, represent the client in negotiations and ensure that any settlement is precise, conditional and enforceable.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, tax, financial or procedural advice. Turkish mediation legislation and judicial practice may change. Each mandatory mediation application should be evaluated according to the parties, legal relationship, claim type, requested remedy, applicable deadlines and legislation in force on the relevant date.