Turkey: Standard Terms Practice In Turkey: The High Court of Appeals Interprets The General Transaction Terms Articles Of The Turkish Code Of Obligations

I. Introduction

The corporate life in present conditions requires a precautional approach and a precise predictability so that the main idea of business, making money, is maximized. This main motive leads some institutions (hereinafter referred to as "contractor"), especially the banks, to prepare well-designed, juridically controlled, ex parte (prepared by one party only) contracts to use in numerous transactions. The pre-drafted provisions contained in these kinds of model contracts are named as "standard terms".

These sort of contracts may be referred to as "adhesion contracts", with the definition of "a type of contract, a legally binding agreement between two parties to do a specific thing, in which one side has all the bargaining power and uses it to form the contract primarily for his or her advantage" if the contractor is qualified as an institution that operates under a permission granted by an authority or by law, or as "standard terms" if the situation requires a more vague definition.

On one hand, these beforehand prepared contracts has some advantages such as the standardization and the rationalization of the contracts[1] as well as the rapidness of the making process of a contract[2]; but on the other hand it prevents the counter party (hereinafter referred to as "contractee"), who has a superior need which needs to be satisfied in no time, to negotiate. Consequently, a "take-it-or-leave-it" situation appears. Thus those kinds of terms violate the freedom of contract[3] as they are unilaterally drafted by one party, ex parte, and not subject to any negotiation. In order to protect the freedom of contract principle, which is probably the most valuable rule of the Turkish Code of Obligations (hereinafter referred to as "TCO"), the legislator, at one point, needed to take necessary steps against the powerful side (the contractor) and in favor of the weaker one (the contractee).

Turkish law incorporated Standard Terms in steps. During the last decade of the previous century, High Court of Appeals interpreted the Article 1 of the Turkish Civil Code, which enables judge to create law in case there is no applicable legislation to the case at hand, broadly to the extent that Standard Terms shall not be valid if they suppress the contractees' willpower. While doing this, the High Court of Appeals also benefited from the comparative law, i.e. Swiss law, German law. Meantime, in 1995, Consumer Protection Law numbered 4077 enacted, in which standard terms against consumers regulated for the first time under the name of unfair terms in contracts. Although the "Unfair Terms in Contracts" section of the Consumer Protection Law was designed to protect solely the consumers against the unfair terms that was a big step in positive law on the route towards the regulation of standard terms.

Finally, the new TCO numbered 6098, which entered into force on 01.07.2012, regulated directly the standard terms under the section titled "General Transaction Terms" under Articles 20-25. The new TCO sets fort restrictions on standard terms for any and all kinds of contracts (e.g. general credit agreements, form financial leasing agreements etc.). One may say that Turkish law has reached to fruition by incorporating the universally accepted principles of general transaction terms into the new TCO. The new TCO also expanded the context of the protection against the standard terms in a way to include protection of both real and legal persons along with the consumers.

II. Standard Terms in Turkish and in Comparative Law

1. Turkish Law

a. Overall[4]

Pursuant to Article 20 of the TCO, general transaction terms is defined as "the contract terms which are previously and unilaterally prepared by one party with a purpose of using them for several numbers of similar contracts and submitted to the other party during the signing of a contract".

Within the scope of the definition, following primary factors taken into account:

(i) the use of contractual terms for several numbers of identical agreements,

(ii) previously and unilaterally preparation, and

(iii) submission to the other party.

Therefore provisions of a contract which are used in numerous transactions, and drafted by one of the parties, ex parte, are by law deemed as "standard terms". It should be noted that the above mentioned criteria must be present at the same time. In other words, provisions of a contract which are prepared by one party, ex parte, with regards to only one specific transaction (and not to be used in numerous transactions) shall not be deemed as "standard terms". If all of these conditions are present, standard terms shall be determined.

Records indicating that each term are discussed by and between the parties and accepted concurringly, cannot be the sole proof to claim that relevant terms are no longer standard terms. In other words, if clause fulfils the conditions required to be considered standard terms contracting parties cannot agree to un-do it.[5] Furthermore, if a contract is partially negotiated and the rest is drafted by one of the parties, ex parte, the provisions of the part which is not negotiated will still be deemed as standard terms.

Pursuant to the new TCO, provisions regarding general transaction terms are also applicable for the contracts prepared by the persons or entities who are rendering services as per the permits granted by law or by authorities without considering the characteristics. Thus, the contracts of the services rendered by the governmental bodies also become subject to the standard terms assessment provided by TCO.

b. Validity[6]

Standard terms of a contract are valid under Turkish law as long as they comply with the provisions set forth under the relevant section of the new TCO. Pursuant to Article 21 of the new TCO, in order for the standard term fall under the contract, it is necessary for the party who drafted the contract to give explicit information to the counter party regarding the existence of these terms, to provide the opportunity to the other party for learning the content of these terms and it is also necessary that the other party accepts such terms. 

Therefore, standard terms are valid, only if the party; whose interests are violated, is aware of and has the opportunity to get information regarding the standard terms of the relevant contract. Otherwise, those standard terms will be deemed as not written. On top of that, if there are any standard terms in a contract which are not relevant with the nature and the characteristics of the contract; those terms will also be deemed as not written even if the party whose interests are violated has been informed of and accepted them.

A doctrinal discussion regarding the invalidity enforcement, i.e. deemed as not written, accepted within the new TCO worth mentioning here. "Deemed not-written" is an expression adopted from Swiss Code of Obligations[7]. Such an expression does not exist in Turkish law discipline, which actually provides mainly the following invalidities: nonexistence, nullity, and annulability. Consequently, it is not clear that whether the enforcement named "deemed not-written" must be categorized under nonexistence or nullity.

c. Interpretation Assessment[8]

Article 23 of the new TCO sets forth the interpretation assessment. According to the article, if a general transaction term is not expressed with a plain language and easily understandable or ambiguous, then it shall be construed against the party who prepared the contract and in favor of the weaker party. This provision with respect to the interpretation assessment is a reflection of the main principles of Roman Law "in dubio contra stipulatorem" (in doubt, the contract construed against the drawee).

Therefore, if a term of a contract is not explicit and clear enough, or have different meanings, such term will be interpreted against the party who has drafted it but in favor of the other party. Likewise, the standard terms in a contract should not contain, by disregarding the principle of good faith, any provision which is against the interest of the counter party and which causes that party to be in a bad condition.

2. Comparative Context

a. German Law[9]

Until the legislation in 1977 "The German Law governing standard business conditions" standard terms of contract was a matter of the courts. It was a specific code which was integrated neither to German Civil Code nor to Code of Obligations. The law provided a three-phased control mechanism. In 2002, the code was integrated into German Civil Code and then to the Act on the Modernization of the Law of Obligations. This new act has a two-stepped control. First the standard terms should be incorporated properly into the contract. In order to do so, the contractor should draw the attention of the contractee to these terms, and the contractee should be allowed to view the context and to take notice of the standard terms. Henceforth the contractee should agree upon the terms. Then a content review should be made in order to determine whether these terms are fair or not. There are some terms which are considered directly as unfair and some other terms that are presumed to be unfair. If there is an inconvenience at any point of these steps then standard terms are void.

b. Swiss Law[10]

Swiss Law has a divergent regulation about the standard terms, referred to as "General Terms and Conditions" in Swiss law discipline. Instead of categorizing it within the code of obligations, Swiss legislator preferred to define the standard term as a violation of unfair competition and to regulate it within the Swiss Act against Unfair Competition. Jurisprudence and doctrine also plays an important role in the practice of standard terms. Swiss law provides three stages. First stage is to review of validity which is the evaluation of the validity of the incorporation of the terms to the contract. The second stage is the interpretation of the general terms and conditions. Third and the last stage is content review to inspect any abuse or inequity.

c. EU Law[11]

Council Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair terms in consumer contracts is published on 05.04.1993. This directive allowed some time, till 31.12.1994, to member states to harmonize their national law as specified in the directive. The directive is based on two notions "good faith" and "significant imbalance". Within the scope and criteria given by the directive, member states are allowed to constitute their own domestic law.

III. High Court of Appeals' Interpretation of Standard Terms

Decisions of the High Court of Appeals will be held in three sections. The decision in the first section reflects the implementation before the enactment of the codes. In the second section, the dispute resolved according to the provisions of the Consumer Protection Law of 1995 and finally the third decision presents the implementation of new TCO principles.

1. In its decision numbered 1998/4263 E. 1998/6098 K. and dated 02.06.1998, the High Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit protects the plaintiff against standard terms, which has not regulated by that time. The case is about a dispute between a public water distribution corporation ("The Defendant") and a subscriber ("The Plaintiff"). The plaintiff requested from the court to declare the inequity that defendant executed while issuing the water bill. The court indicated that; among Turkish laws, there is no legal regulation about standard terms. In that case it is judge's duty to decide interpretations, fulfilment or invalidity of the provisions. In order to do so the comparative context especially the German and the Swiss laws and their jurisprudence will be held in consideration.[12]

In another decision numbered 1996/3-717 E. 1996/850 K. and dated 04.12.1996 of the High Court Assembly of Civil Chambers, when the legal protection regarding the standard terms has not been accepted, the high court resolved the dispute by executing the principle of good faith, the prohibition of the abuse of rights and equity.

2. The High Court of Appeals for the 13th Circuit, applied the provisions of the Consumer Protection Law of 1995 in its decision numbered 2008/4345 E. and 2008/6088 K. and dated 02.05.2008. The case is between a bank (The Plaintiff) and a borrower (The Defendant) and about unfair credit card fees. The high court indicated that: (i) once the contract is examined, one can see that it is prepared by the plaintiff bank in a printed and standardized form and the empty parts are filled through writing numbers, names and addresses; (ii) the contract is not formatted in bold black letters of font size 12[13]; (iii) the plaintiff cannot assert and prove that the clause[14], which puts the consumer under the obligation of paying a card-holder fee and works to his detriment as a result, was determined after a negotiation with the consumer. Therefore, it must be assumed that the clause stipulating the collection of a card-holder fee is an unjust term under the provisions of the aforementioned codes and regulations. By extension, the plaintiff bank cannot demand fees through a standard term from the defendant credit-user on the basis of this clause.[15]

3. In its decision numbered 2014/13315 E. 2014/13503 K. and dated 29.04.2014, the High Court of Appeals for the 13th Circuit approved the decision numbered 2013/371 E. 2013/606 K. and dated 27.12.2013 of the Sivas 1st Civil Court of First Instance which propounds a remarkable perspective on general transaction terms which was regulated by then by the new TCO. The decision was made in order to resolve a case between a bank (The Defendant) and a borrower (The Plaintiff). The plaintiff requested from the defendant bank to return the commission, the mortgage release, the early credit return fee and the fees collected under the name of file costs, which he deem to be illegitimate, all paid by the claimant in return for a commercial credit. In their response, the defendant claims that the plaintiff has been well-informed about these fees and therefore they are fair. The court indicated that; (i) according to Article 20/3 of the TCO, informing the borrower about it does not stop them being the general transaction terms; (ii) according to Article 21/1 of the TCO, various fees stipulated in the contract to the detriment of the plaintiff, the early return commission fee and the mortgage release fee should be deemed not-written. The collection of fees deemed non-written is an explicit violation of standard terms on the part of the bank and these fees must be returned.[16]

In his justification the court remarks, in general, "... Due to the social and economic developments of our age, many persons and establishments prepare "standard terms", drawn in an abstract and one–sided way, before the stipulation of the individual contract between two parties, thus regulating future legal transactions which are indefinite in quantity, yet similar in form and type. These characteristic contract clauses prepared beforehand are called "standard terms" and the contracts that are stipulated using them are dubbed "typical contracts" or "formularized contracts." Standard terms, which are prepared by experts taking into account every possibility, protect solely the interests of the party who gets them prepared and uses them in most cases. Whereas, the other party is not aware of the existence or the contents of the standard terms or does not have the means to fully understand them and consider every possibility related to them or lacks the bargaining power to refuse to accept them. Indeed, during the stipulation of such contracts aimed at masses, there is no room for meetings and negotiations, perhaps with the exception of a couple of points such as the price and the due date. As a result, the other party, in the face of the establishments that have the contract prepared, could either agree to the terms imposed upon him or do without the performance or service presented through the contract. To put it another way, the other party would have to say either "completely yes" or "completely no" to the contract; he would not be able to say "yes, but..." and demand that parts of the contract be altered. For instance, a trader could either get a credit through signing the contract put before him by the bank or give up on getting the credit. Likewise, the individual could either sign the subscription agreement put before him by the concessionaire company or give up on having electricity and running water in his residence. Taking into consideration that it is not possible to refuse certain performances and services and to say "yes, but...", the individual needs to be protected by the imperative provisions of the legislation during the execution of contracts that he is forced to sign, against his will.

As can be seen above, High Court of Appeals, by approving the decision of the local court, have a clear and certain opinion about standard terms.

IV. Conclusion

Applying standard terms is tool which is widely used and implemented for many years as it has remained judicially uncontrolled. The field of standard terms has been regulated generally for the first time in Turkish law by the enactment of the new TCO. While doing so, the legislator has benefited from the comparative law as well as "judicial know-how".

Maintaining the balance between the parties of transactions in commercial life plays a vital importance in a competition environment. One may argue that the basic principle of protection against standard terms system is to interfere with the freedom of contract in minimum, and to resolve the contractual injustice. By enacting the general transaction terms, Turkish legislator "gently" interrupted to the freedom of contract, one of the leading principles of the TCO, in order to "reinstate" the power balance between the parties of the contract.


[1] Tekinay/Akman/Burcuoğlu/Altop, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler, İstanbul 1993, p. 156 ff.; M. Kemal Oğuzman/M. Turgut Öz, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler, İstanbul 2014, p. 20; M. Yeşim Atamer, Sözleşme Özgürlüğünün Sınırlandırılması Sorunu Çerçevesinde Genel İşlem Şartlarının Denetlenmesi, İstanbul 1999, p.61 ff; Ayşe Havutçu, Açık Denetimi Yoluyla Tüketicinin Genel İşlem Şartlarına Karşı Korunması, İzmir 2003, p.74; Fikret Eren, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler, Ankara  2012,  p. 215.

[2] Eren, p. 215.

[3] TCO § 26.

[4] TCO § 20.

[5] Oğuzman/Öz, p.166.

[6] TCO § 21-23, 25.

[7] Federal Act on the Amendment of the Swiss Civil Code (Part Five: The Code of Obligations) §995, 999, 1002, 1006, 1109, 1110.

[8] TCO § 23.

[9] http://www.jurawelt.com/sunrise/media/mediafiles/14586/German_Standard_Terms_of_Contract_Thomas_Zerres.pdf (Last viewed on 27/08/2015).

[10] http://www.lalive.ch/data/publications/CLInt_8_2_June_2013_feature_Ehle_Moss.pdf (Last viewed on 27/08/2015) ;http://www.homburger.ch/fileadmin/publications/Bulletin_02.04.2012.pdf (Last viewed on 27/08/2015).

[11] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/bibliotheque/briefing/2013/130624/LDM_BRI(2013)130624_REV1_EN.pdf  (Last viewed on 27/08/2015).

[12] http://www.kazanci.com/kho2/ibb/files/3hd-1998-4263.htm (Last viewed on 26/08/2015).

[13] Should be stipulated in bold black letters with a minimum font size of 12 according to CPC § 6 VI.

[14] CPC § 6 III.

[15] http://www.kazanci.com/kho2/ibb/files/13hd-2008-4345.htm (Last viewed on 26/08/2015).

[16] http://www.kazanci.com/kho2/ibb/files/13hd-2014-13315.htm (Last viewed on 26/08/2015).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Guzeloglu Attorneys-at-law
Herguner Bilgen Ozeke Attorney Partnership
 
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Guzeloglu Attorneys-at-law
Herguner Bilgen Ozeke Attorney Partnership
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions