Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 25 NOVEMBER 2019

Mandatory Mediation In IP Disputes

Deris Attorney At Law Partnership
Explore more from Deris Attorney At Law Partnership

The IP Court of Istanbul recently dismissed a copyright infringement action involving compensation claim, on grounds that the plaintiff has not implemented the procedural requirement to apply for meditation before ...

TurkeyLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Okan Çan
Okan Çan
Elif Türkan Dinçer
Elif Türkan Dinçer
Author LinkedIn connections

The IP Court of Istanbul recently dismissed a copyright infringement action involving compensation claim, on grounds that the plaintiff has not implemented the procedural requirement to apply for meditation before filing the court action.

The Court's decision is based on the recent legislation (Law No: 7155) which entered into force on January 1, 2019. The Law requires the implementation of the mediation procedure before instituting the court action. This means that the plaintiff should submit the mediation minutes indicating the outcome of the mediation proceeding together with the motions for instituting the court action. In the absence of the minutes, the Court shall grant 1 week to the plaintiff to submit the minutes and if it is determined that the action is filed without implementing the mediation procedure; the court action shall be dismissed on procedural grounds due to the lack of condition enabling to file the court action.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

The Competence-Competence Principle

The competence-competence principle grants arbitral tribunals the authority to determine their own jurisdiction, including questions about the validity and scope of arbitration agreements. This article examines how Turkish law implements this fundamental arbitration doctrine through statutory provisions and judicial precedent, analyzing the balance between arbitral autonomy and judicial oversight in both domestic and international arbitration proceedings.
TurkeyLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Kesikli Law Firm
Kesikli Law Firm
Article

Recognition And Enforcement Of Foreign Judgments In Turkey 2026

This article examines the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments in Turkey. It considers finality, reciprocity, jurisdiction, public policy, service, documentary requirements, security and the relationship between enforcement permission and actual collection. The discussion distinguishes foreign judgments from arbitral awards and from decisions eligible for a separate administrative registration route.
TurkeyLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
ONGUR & PARTNERS
ONGUR & PARTNERS
Article

Dispute Resolution In Türkiye 2026

This article examines litigation, arbitration and mediation as distinct but connected methods of resolving cross-border disputes involving Türkiye. It considers jurisdiction, service, security for foreign claimants, arbitral consent, institutional procedures, mandatory mediation and the enforcement of outcomes. The statutory and treaty framework is read alongside the judicial authorities cited in the manuscript.
TurkeyLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
ONGUR & PARTNERS
ONGUR & PARTNERS
Article

Inheritance Fraud Lawsuits: Legal Nature, Requirements, And Litigation Process

Inheritance fraud (muris muvazaası) is one of the most common inheritance-related disputes in Turkish legal practice. It typically arises when a deceased person (the decedent) transfers real property to one heir by disguising what is, in reality, a gratuitous transfer (gift) as a sale or a contract of maintenance until death, with the intention of depriving the remaining heirs of their inheritance rights. Although such transactions appear legally valid on their face, they do not reflect the parties' true intentions and are therefore evaluated under the legal principles governing sham transactions (muvazaa).
TurkeyLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Sakar Law Office
Sakar Law Office
Article

The Duty Of Disclosure Before The U.S.P.T.O.

In contrast to practice before the Turkish Patent Institute (TPI), the European Patent Office (EPO), the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), which do not require any disclosure of known prior art for a patent application filing of first instance2, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) imposes an affirmative duty on a patent applicant to disclose known and material prior art during the life of a patent application.
United StatesIntellectual Property
Deris Attorney At Law Partnership
Deris Attorney At Law Partnership