e-book2011

LAW OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

297

The Preliminary Examination among the Reforms

of the Civil Procedure Act

Att. Alper Uzun

The Civil Procedure Act number 6100 which came into force on the

1st of October 2011 superseded the Civil Procedure and Judicial Act

number 1086 and has changed in many ways our procedural law. The most

important one of these changes resides in the “preliminary examination”

institution.

The preliminary examination, which is established as a phase of

the trial proceedings and did not exist in our legislation before the Civil

Procedure Act, is regulated between the articles 137 to 142 of the Civil

Procedure Act. The reason behind the admission of the preliminary

examination institution in the legislation is indicated as the great

increase of the workload and the lengthening of the trail period due to

the commencement of investigations by the Courts without a proper

preparation, i.e. incomplete evidence collection, and without constituting

the necessary background in order to resolve the dispute (this fact received

in practice a significant complaint and was shown as the reason behind

the lengthening of the trail process), and due to the fact that one has to

wait until the end of the trail in order to receive information on procedure

related trial conditions and the judgments on the first objections. As

known, until today, in practice, setting a trial date without respecting the

arrangements and phases of trial set in the Civil Procedure and Judicial

Act, without even the completion of the exchange phase of the petitions,

redundant trials were held, which were causing a very important amount

of workload for Courts and parties and where no procedural operations

had been made flourished thus the trial period had been lengthened

needlessly.

With the Civil Procedure Act and with the “preliminary examination”

institution, whose framework is explicitly put forward, it is aimed to

preclude these problems, to make the necessary preparation for the trial

and to achieve the resolution of the dispute with right and swift steps.

Article of November 2011