Background
The underlying compensation action was decided by the Ankara West 1st Commercial Court of First Instance on June 17, 2026, in case No. 2022/1233 E., 2026/421 K. The defendants appealed that judgment.
Two plaintiffs, both born on September 17, 2007, had participated in the proceedings through a parent acting as their legal representative, who had appointed counsel. They reached adulthood on September 17, 2025, ending the parent’s authority arising from custody before the trial court entered judgment.
The appellate chamber found no power of attorney in the record showing that the now-adult plaintiffs had personally authorized the lawyer. Nevertheless, the trial court’s judgment had been served on that lawyer.
The Court’s Holding
The Ankara Regional Court of Appeal did not decide the merits of the defendants’ appeals. Acting under Article 352 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it unanimously returned the file to the trial court so the defect concerning counsel’s authority and service could be addressed.
The trial court must give counsel a definite deadline to submit any power of attorney granted personally by the two adult plaintiffs. If timely submitted, it must be added to the record. If no authorization is produced, the original judgment, any supplemental decision, and the defendants’ appellate petitions must be served directly on the two plaintiffs, and the applicable appeal period must be allowed to run. The file must then be sent back to the regional appellate court in either event.
Key Takeaways
- A parent’s authority to represent a child through custody ends when the child reaches adulthood.
- A lawyer appointed by the parent does not automatically appear in the record as personally authorized by the now-adult party.
- An appellate court may return the file without reaching the merits when authority of counsel and proper service must first be regularized.
Why It Matters
The decision highlights a procedural transition that can affect litigation lasting beyond a claimant’s minority. Once a minor party becomes an adult, courts and counsel must ensure that the record contains the adult party’s own authorization or that procedural documents are served on the party directly.
Failure to address that transition can undermine the effectiveness of service and prevent the appellate timetable from being reliably determined, delaying merits review until the record is corrected.