Partial Lawsuits and Indeterminate Claim Lawsuits in Turkey

A partial lawsuit (kısmi dava, HMK Article 109) lets you sue for part of a claim whose total you already know; an indeterminate claim lawsuit (belirsiz alacak davası, HMK Article 107) lets you sue when the exact amount is genuinely unknowable at filing. The two tools look alike but protect your limitation period, your interest, and your court fees very differently, so the choice is one of the most consequential early decisions in a Turkish money claim. This guide explains how each works, when each fits, and the traps a foreign creditor should avoid.

Why these two lawsuit types matter for creditors

In a money claim, a creditor must normally state how much is owed. Yet you can hold a valid claim and still be unable to fix the precise figure when you file - the loss may depend on an expert valuation, the debtor may hold the records you need, or interest and damages may still be accruing. Turkish civil procedure answers this with two separate instruments under the Code of Civil Procedure (Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu, Law No. 6100, "HMK").

• Indeterminate claim lawsuit (belirsiz alacak davası) - HMK Article 107.
• Partial lawsuit (kısmi dava) - HMK Article 109.

Both are ordinary civil procedure tools, used in the general civil courts (asliye hukuk mahkemesi) or, for commercial disputes between merchants, the commercial courts (asliye ticaret mahkemesi). They look similar from the outside, but they protect your rights in different ways. For a foreigner pursuing a debtor or counterparty in Türkiye, picking the correct form at the outset shapes how much of your claim survives, when interest starts running, and what you pay upfront. Our debt collection and enforcement team weighs this choice for every claim we file.

What is a partial lawsuit (kısmi dava)?

A partial lawsuit is one in which the claimant deliberately sues for only part of a receivable or right arising from a single legal relationship, and leaves the rest for later. It is governed by HMK Article 109.

Core conditions under HMK 109

• Divisible subject matter. The claim must be capable of being split by its nature. A sum of money is the classic example.
• Same legal relationship. The part sued for and the part reserved must arise from the same underlying relationship - one contract, one tort event. Most partial claims grow out of a breach-of-contract claim where the debt is known but the creditor wants to test the case or limit upfront cost.

Filing part does not waive the rest

Filing a partial lawsuit is not a waiver of the remaining portion. HMK 109/3 makes clear that suing for part does not imply you have given up the balance - unless you expressly renounce it when filing. You can return for the rest in a later action.

The 2015 amendment

The original second paragraph of HMK 109 barred a partial lawsuit where the amount was undisputed or clearly fixed between the parties. That paragraph was repealed by Law No. 6644 (enacted 1 April 2015, published in the Official Gazette on 11 April 2015). Since then the partial lawsuit has been broadly available again, including for divisible money claims that are not in dispute. The current Article 109 has only two operative paragraphs - a divisible claim may be partly sued, and partial suit implies no waiver - so do not assume it authorises other forms of relief it does not mention.

How do you recover the rest?

Two routes get you the reserved balance:

• Amendment within the same case (ıslah, HMK Articles 176-181). You can amend your claim once to raise the sued amount, typically after an expert report fixes the figure.
• A supplementary action (ek dava). You file a fresh, separate lawsuit for the balance.

The catch is timing: on the reserved part, both default interest and the limitation interruption usually attach only from the date you amend or file the supplementary action - not from your original filing.

What is an indeterminate claim lawsuit (belirsiz alacak davası)?

An indeterminate claim lawsuit, under HMK Article 107, lets a creditor sue when it is genuinely impossible or unreasonable to fix the exact amount at the filing date. You identify the legal relationship, state a minimum amount or value, and finalise the claim once the true figure becomes determinable. An unjust enrichment claim is a typical example - the amount to be returned often cannot be pinned down until the court examines the evidence.

How it works under HMK 107

• File on a minimum. You specify the legal basis and a temporary minimum sum.
• Finalise the figure. Once the amount becomes ascertainable - through the defendant's disclosures or the court's investigation (tahkikat) - you raise the claim to the full figure. Critically, after the Law No. 7251 amendment of 2020, this is done by a simple claim-increase (talep artırımı) and no longer requires ıslah, the separate procedural amendment used in a partial lawsuit.
• Two-week deadline. Under HMK 107/2, once the amount becomes determinable you have a definite two-week period (kesin süre) to finalise the claim. This increase is free of the general ban on expanding claims (the prohibition on iddianın genişletilmesi).
• If you do not increase it, the case is decided on the originally stated minimum amount.

Why creditors often prefer it

• Limitation is interrupted for the whole claim, not just the stated minimum - the single biggest advantage over the partial lawsuit.
• Default interest can run on the full amount from the date of the debtor's default, not merely from the date you later raise the claim.

A worked example

Suppose a foreign company is owed for defective goods, but the exact loss depends on a court-appointed expert who has not yet valued the damage.

• Indeterminate route. The company files a belirsiz alacak davası stating a minimum of, say, 100,000 TL. The expert later assesses the true loss at 450,000 TL. Within the two-week period after the figure becomes determinable, the company raises its claim to 450,000 TL by talep artırımı. Limitation was interrupted for the full 450,000 TL on the original filing date, and default interest can run on that full amount from the debtor's default.
• Partial route, by contrast. Had the company instead sued for 100,000 TL as a partial lawsuit and later pursued the 350,000 TL balance by ıslah or a supplementary action, limitation would have been interrupted for only the first 100,000 TL at filing, and interest on the 350,000 TL balance would generally run only from the later amendment or supplementary action.

Figures here are illustrative only. The right form depends on whether the indeterminacy is genuine, which is a legal judgment to make before filing.

Partial lawsuit vs indeterminate claim: the key differences

The practical distinction comes down to what each tool protects.

The court fee (harç) angle

The proportional fee on a money claim (nispi karar ve ilam harcı, and the application fee) is calculated on the value you state. A partial lawsuit lets you pay upfront on the smaller part you sue, which is the single most common practical reason creditors choose it. When you later raise the claim - by ıslah in a partial suit, or by talep artırımı in an indeterminate suit - the proportional fee is topped up on the additional amount. So the indeterminate route does not avoid the fee; it defers part of it while still protecting your whole limitation period.

Can you switch types after filing?

Turkish courts treat the choice between these two as a substantive procedural election, and the safest assumption is that you cannot freely convert one into the other after filing. In practice, though, the Yargıtay is fact-sensitive: where a claimant has mislabelled the action, courts have at times re-characterised it - for example treating a wrongly-chosen belirsiz alacak davası as a partial lawsuit - rather than dismissing it outright. You should not rely on being rescued this way. The form should be chosen correctly at the complaint stage, because a court may refuse to convert and you may lose ground you cannot recover.

How the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay) approaches these cases

The Yargıtay has consistently stressed that the indeterminate claim lawsuit is reserved for claims that are truly unknowable at filing - not claims that are merely inconvenient or troublesome to calculate. Where a claimant could reasonably have determined the amount (for instance, a defined contractual sum), courts have rejected the indeterminate route. The Hukuk Genel Kurulu (Civil General Assembly) and the labour and commercial chambers have produced a settled line of authority on this test and on the rule that a belirsiz alacak davası interrupts limitation for the whole claim.

Two points recur in the case law: the lawsuit type must be correctly identified in the initial complaint, and the claimant must be able to show the indeterminacy was genuine. Filing under the wrong type can lead to procedural problems, though courts will sometimes re-characterise rather than dismiss. Because these positions are fact-sensitive and evolve, the form should be assessed for your specific claim before you file.

Practical guidance for foreigners pursuing a claim in Türkiye

If you are a foreign creditor, investor, or company chasing a debt or damages in Türkiye, the choice between these two actions affects your recovery, your costs, and whether part of your claim survives.

• Map the limitation periods first. The TBK No. 6098 sets the deadlines - broadly a ten-year general period (TBK Article 146), a five-year period for certain recurring and commercial claims (TBK Article 147), and, for tort, a relative period running from when you learn of the harm plus a long-stop, with overlap to any longer criminal-law period (TBK Article 72). Know your deadline before deciding how to file.
• Decide what you can prove now. If the figure depends on documents the debtor holds or on a court-appointed expert, an indeterminate claim may protect you better.
• Weigh court fee against protection. A partial lawsuit can cut your upfront fee, but at the cost of weaker limitation and interest protection on the reserved part.
• Plan the recovery, not just the judgment. Winning is only half the job; you then have to enforce. See how the courts handle enforcing the judgment through icra under the Execution and Bankruptcy Law (İİK No. 2004), and how our team approaches enforcing a Turkish money judgment.
• Get representation early. A locally qualified lawyer can file and run the case for you - you can usually grant a power of attorney for use in Turkey from abroad, without needing to travel.

If you would like our team to assess which route fits your claim, you can reach us through the contact page.

Frequently asked questions