A Turkish court can order a party to produce a document that party holds, wherever it happens to be kept, and can order a third person or institution to produce one as well. The Code of Civil Procedure (Law No. 6100) attaches the duty to possession rather than to location, which is how a contract kept in a London office or a ledger held in Frankfurt ends up in a Turkish case file. Articles 219 to 222 set out that duty, what follows from ignoring it and, for anyone budgeting a translation, how much of a large record actually has to go in.
The duty follows possession
Article 219(1) requires the parties to produce to the court all the documents in their possession that they themselves or the opposing party rely on as evidence. Electronic documents are produced by taking a print out and, where this is requested, by being saved in an electronic medium suitable for examination. Article 199 defines a document in wide terms for these purposes: written or printed text, deeds, drawings, plans, sketches, photographs, film, image or sound recordings, data held in an electronic medium and similar information carriers, so long as they are capable of proving the facts in dispute.
Only the relevant parts of a large record
Article 219(2) is the paragraph worth reading before a translation is commissioned: for continuously used documents such as commercial books, certified copies of the relevant parts alone may be produced to the court. A ledger covering ten years does not have to travel in full, and what needs rendering into Turkish is the extract rather than the volume. Which parts are relevant is a decision for counsel in the case.
When the court orders production
Article 220(1) sets the conditions for an order against a party. The court has to be satisfied that the document sought is necessary for proving the matter raised and that the request complies with the law, and in addition one of four things has to be true: the other side has admitted holding the document, has remained silent on the request, the existence of the document appears from an official record, or it has been admitted in another document. Where that is so, the court gives a definite time limit for production.
Denying possession, and the oath
Article 220(2) covers the party who denies holding the document: an oath is offered, to the effect that no such document is in their possession, that they could not find it despite a careful search and that they do not know where it is. Under Article 220(3), where the party ordered to produce fails to do so within the time given and does not show within the same time, with evidence, an acceptable excuse, or denies possession and neither accepts nor performs the oath offered, the court may accept the other party’s statement about the content of the document.
Third persons and institutions
Article 221(1) allows the court, where it decides that a document in the hands of a third person or institution is necessary for proving a matter raised by the parties, to order its production. Article 221(2) obliges anyone so ordered to produce the document or, being unable to, to explain the reason with evidence, and where the court does not find the explanation sufficient it may hear that person as a witness. Article 221(3) then supplies the limit: those under a duty to produce may decline to produce the document, or to testify about it, on the grounds that apply to refusing to give evidence, and the provisions on witnesses apply to them.
Commercial books, on their own terms
Article 222 treats commercial books separately. The court may order their production in commercial cases of its own motion or on a party’s request. For the entries to be accepted as evidence the books have to have been kept completely and in accordance with the law, opening and closing certifications have to have been obtained, and the entries have to confirm one another. Article 222(3) makes entries kept that way evidence in favour of their holder only where the other party’s books, kept to the same standard, do not contradict them, or where that party does not produce its books, and adds that books containing no entry at all on the point cannot be used in the holder’s favour. Article 222(4) has entries in books lacking opening or closing certifications, or not confirming one another, count against the holder, and Article 222(5) lets a party who is not a merchant accept the entries in the merchant’s books, with the result that if the merchant then declines to produce them the party asking is deemed to have proved its claim.
Which parts cross into Turkish
Acte Tercüme translates contracts, correspondence, print outs of electronic records and extracts from commercial books into Turkish for production in a Turkish case, and Turkish production orders and expert reports into English or French. A document written in another language also brings Article 223 of the Code into play, which is covered elsewhere on this site; the translation keeps the pagination and the entry dates of the original, since an extract is read against them.