What is confession? what are the types of confessions?

According to the Code of Civil Procedure, evidence is collected under two headings: definitive and discretionary evidence.

As we will explain below in our examination titled "What is a confession?", confession evidence is regulated in Article 188 of the Code of Civil Procedure, sometimes as definitive and sometimes as discretionary evidence. In the relevant article, the conditions of the confession are included, but no definition is made about the confession. For this reason, it is necessary to benefit from judicial decisions and doctrine to define confession. Confession according to the meaning given by the Supreme Court; In an ongoing case, one of the parties accepts the truth of the material fact put forward by the other party that may have legal consequences against him/her.

Based on this, it should be noted that the parties' acceptance of the truth of the facts put forward in their favor cannot be considered as an admission. As a matter of fact, according to the Supreme Court of Appeals HGK:

"In order to be considered an admission, one party must have put forward a fact, and the other party must state that this fact is true. The subject of the admission can only be the facts put forward by the other party. A party's declaration of the truth of a fact put forward by itself does not constitute an admission, and the legal reasons put forward by the other party cannot be the subject of an admission."

Both the defendant and the plaintiff can make the confession. Each side may state that the facts presented by the other are true. In the event of a party's admission in a contentious issue, proof will not be required since the disputed facts will cease to be contentious. The confession can also be made by the attorneys of the parties.

It should be noted that confession is different from acceptance of the case. While the acceptance is accepted as a result of the request, the admission will be brought to the agenda in terms of facts. Again, while the acceptance of the case concludes the case, only the truth of the facts put forward is accepted in the confession.

HOW TO MAKE CONFERENCE?

There are various types of confession. Under this heading, we will classify the types of confessions according to the way they are made.

The confession can be made in front of the court or outside the court. In this respect, it is subject to a double distinction.

In-Court Confession

The form of the confession made in front of the court and against the court is called in-court confession. The confession is made with the unilateral will of the party making the confession. One of the consequences of a unilateral declaration of will is that it does not depend on the acceptance of the other party, and the other is that it can be made in the absence of the other party.

In this case, it is possible for the confession to be made verbally or in writing. In verbal confessions, the confession is recorded in the minutes. The prepared minutes are signed.

Written confession is made by submitting a petition. One of the important issues here is:

The confession will be valid even if it is made in an unauthorized court.

The confession made before the court is conclusive evidence. An in-court confession made in one case is also valid in another case. In the following Supreme Court decision, the following provision was established as an example:

"The in-court confession must be made by the parties or their authorized representatives, and the confession must be made before the court within the trial. The in-court confession can be made verbally before the court, or the fact can be acknowledged with a petition or petition. In-court confession is a conclusive evidence.

It should be emphasized that an in-court confession made in one case is also valid in another case and constitutes conclusive evidence (Prof. Dr. Baki Kuru, Civil Procedure Procedure, Sixth Edition, Istanbul 2001, C:2, p:2045).

Within the framework of the material and legal facts explained above; The defendant's statement in his petition dated 04/11/2011, stating that he paid a total of 176,120 TL to the plaintiff on various dates in 2008, 2009 and 2010, is an in-court confession and must be evaluated by the court. As a matter of fact, the plaintiff claimed that the total payment of 253,077 TL, determined by the expert according to the book records and based on the court's decision, did not belong to the defendant, but were fees collected from other industrial sites where services were provided, and added the contracts between them and other industrial sites to his statement. As explained by the plaintiff, it is seen that in the details of the total payment of 253,077 TL, which is the basis for the decision, in the plaintiff's books, the phrase "collected manually from other industrialists" and similar phrases are included, and there is no statement clearly indicating that it was paid by the defendant."

Likewise, confessions made in criminal cases are also considered valid before civil courts. Below are some Supreme Court decisions on the subject:

"The confession will remain valid even if it is made in a court without jurisdiction or jurisdiction or in another court (case) due to the fact that the confession is a party procedure and is made before the court. The important point here is that the institution before which the declaration is made has the nature of a court. For this reason, the confessions in the preliminary injunction and evidence determination files and the confessions in the discovery report are also considered as confessions before the court.

18. However, the confession in the criminal case is also valid in the civil case (Kuru, p. 2047). Therefore, the statements of the parties to the civil case during the criminal case regarding the acceptance of a fact claimed or defended in the civil case are considered as confessions before the court in accordance with Article 188 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the civil case. On the other hand, the decision to postpone the announcement of the verdict stating that the conviction of the defendant as a result of the criminal case does not have any legal consequences will not change the result, and the confession in the criminal case will be binding on the judge in the civil case. Because the decision to postpone the announcement of the verdict is not a final judgment of conviction and there is no final judgment of conviction in the sense of criminal law, it will not be binding on the civil judge in accordance with Article 74 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (TBK) [Article 53 of the Code of Obligations No. 818 (BK); However, the civil judge obtained during the criminal trial; It can be based on evidence such as witness statements, party confessions and documents." YHGK 2021/99 K.

"In the criminal file where the defendant was tried, the plaintiff was heard under oath as a witness; In the plaintiff's statement: "I took the title deed on my child." he said. It is understood from the plaintiff's testimony that instead of the independent section number 12, which he purchased from the defendants, he transferred the independent section number 9 of the same place to his son on the same day as the date of the crime, by selling it from the contractor defendant. The plaintiff's statement in the criminal file; It confirmed the defendants' defense that the independent section number 9 was transferred to the plaintiff in the name of the plaintiff's son upon the plaintiff's request, instead of the independent section number 12, in accordance with the contract, and the plaintiff admitted with this statement that the defendants performed the performance arising from the contract in question. In this case, the court must decide to reject the case." Y7HD. 2023/2204 K.

"In the concrete dispute, the plaintiff claimed in his petition that his insurance was paid at the minimum wage and that his labor receivables were not paid, although his wage was 2,000.00 TL, but he did not specify who terminated his employment contract, and the defendant argued that his employment contract was terminated in line with the minutes kept due to the plaintiff's absences. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit requesting the determination of his premium-based earnings and was heard in the same court. In the petition of appeal dated 27.04.2016 of the file numbered 2014/186 E., the plaintiff's attorney stated as follows: "My client had to leave the defendant workplace because his wages were not paid on time and he could not receive annual paid leave. In its defense, the defendant company claimed that my client disrupted the order of the workplace, did not come to work regularly and was absent, and tried to put my client in a difficult situation and make him lose the case. However; "My client has the right to terminate the employment contract for just cause, in accordance with the provision of Article 24 of the Labor Law, and he terminated the employment contract for just cause." and explained that the employment contract was terminated by the plaintiff for just cause. Considering this petition of the plaintiff's attorney, it is clear that the plaintiff worker, whose labor receivables were not paid, terminated the employment contract for just cause, and since it is understood that the party who terminated the employment contract, even for justified reason, cannot be entitled to notice compensation, the plaintiff worker's demand for notice compensation is not valid. "While it should have been rejected, its acceptance was erroneous and required reversal." Y9HD. 2019/13345 K.

2- Out of Court Confession

It is also possible for the confession to be made outside the court. A document containing a confession may have been found here, such as a letter, SMS or similar. Again, a fact may have been confessed in the presence of other people.

In this type of confession, confessional evidence is not accepted as conclusive evidence. It has discretionary evidence value and the trial is conducted this way.

Confessions made in institutions such as the prosecutor's office and the police are considered as out-of-court confessions. However, there are also decisions of the Supreme Court in which the confessions in the prosecutor's statements are considered as conclusive evidence. In our opinion, confessions made outside the court should be considered as discretionary evidence.

It is worth remembering that the confessions made during the settlement negotiations will not be binding on the parties. In addition, in cases where settlement negotiations are held in secret, disclosing these confessions may constitute a crime. For example, even if a confession is made during mediation, this confession cannot be disclosed within the framework of the confidentiality principle.

RETRACTION

HMK's 188/2. According to the article:

"The confession cannot be retracted unless it is caused by a material error."

A legal error (i.e., error in knowing the legal consequences of the confession) is not sufficient to retract the confession.

The confession can only be revoked on the grounds that it arose from a material error. However, in case of a material mistake, the confessor must prove two things together in order to recant his confession;

A- The admitted fact is not true (it is contrary to reality).

B- The confession was made as a result of a material error.

For this reason, if the party has knowingly admitted a fact that is not true, it cannot go back on it.

TYPES OF ADMISSION AND DIVISION OF ADMISSION

Although it is not included in the law, the confession is subject to various distinctions in practice and doctrine. We mentioned above the differences according to the place where the confession is made. Here, we will explain the differences according to the way the confession is made. Confession; Full or partial confession, depending on whether it covers the whole or a certain part of the disputed material fact, and in terms of its content; It is classified as simple (adi), qualified (mewsuf) or compound (ink) confession.

1-Simple Admission

Simple admission; It is the acceptance that a fact put forward by the other party is true, without any terms or conditions. The facts that are the subject of a simple confession do not need to be proven separately. Here, the definitive evidence feature of the confession comes to the fore.

2- Qualified Admission

In this type of acknowledgment, also known as a qualified acknowledgment, the existence of the material fact put forward by the other party is accepted, but it is stated that its legal nature is different from what is claimed. In a qualified confession, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. Although the fact is accepted, when it is claimed that it has a different legal character, qualified admission will be mentioned. Since a qualified confession cannot be divided, the burden of proof belongs to the party asserting the fact, not to the defendant. An example Supreme Court decision is shared below:

"The plaintiff's claim that he sent the money transfer, for which the reason for sending was not specified, to the defendant P. Y. to be given as a loan, was not accepted by the defendant, on the contrary, it was argued that these money were payments made in return for the transfer of company shares. Thus, the defendant P. Y. admitted that the money subject to the case was sent to him (material fact), however, it was not for the reason put forward by the plaintiff (receiving it as a loan) but for another reason (company share transfer). Arguing that it was sent for the purpose of payment in return, he stated that the legal nature of the event was different from what was claimed.

Considering the defendant P.Y.'s statement that the legal nature of the material fact he confessed was different from what was claimed, it is very clear that in the concrete case, a simple (ordinary) or compound confession cannot be made. Because, the basic condition of both is that the alleged material fact and its legal nature are accepted together. For this reason, the justification and acceptance stated in the local court decision in the evaluation of defendant P.Y.'s defense were not found to be correct.

It has been explained above that although the fact is accepted, if it is claimed that it has a different legal character, qualified confession should be mentioned and qualified confession cannot be divided.

Then, in the concrete case, the defense of the defendant P.Y. is in the nature of a qualified confession (reasoned denial) and this confession cannot be divided. Accordingly, in a qualified confession, the burden of proof belongs to the party asserting the fact (the plaintiff), not to the party making the confession (defendant P.Y.).

In this case, the plaintiff is obliged to prove his claim that the money subject to the lawsuit was sent as a debt; Accordingly, defendant P.Y. has no obligation to prove the loan relationship."

3- Compound Admission

In this type of admission, the party accepts the fact. But he offers another reason that eliminates this fact. In a compound admission, the fact put forward by one party is fully accepted by the other party; In other words, although it is accepted that the fact is true and has the characteristics stated, a fact is added to the confession in such a way that this added fact either prevents the legal consequences of the admitted fact from arising or nullifies it.

"Compound confession is divided into two as linked compound admission and unconnected compound admission, depending on whether there is a connection between the fact that is the subject of the confession and the fact that is added to it. We will explain this issue separately. In doctrine and practice, it is generally accepted that confession types other than unconnected compound admission cannot be divided, therefore, in such cases, the confessor is not under the burden of proof, and the burden of proving his claim is on the other party. It is accepted that it belongs." YHGK

The issue is exemplified in the following Supreme Court decision:

In terms of the payment made with the receipt bearing the description "Payment of the vehicle with plate number 85.100,00 TL dated 27/03/2012"; In the petition, it is stated that the balance loan debt of 85,000.00 TL of the vehicle with plate number, which the plaintiff bought with a loan, was paid to the bank by the defendant and the unsellable record on the vehicle was removed, and the loan debt of 85,000.00 TL obtained from the plaintiff's family was paid to the defendant and the vehicle was taken back. With this statement, the plaintiff admitted that the money was sent to him (the material fact) and that it was sent for the reason put forward by the defendant (as a debt) (the legal nature of the fact), but he added a fact to his confession that "the money was paid to the defendant". It was claimed that with this added fact, the acknowledged fact became invalid, that is, the debt ended. As explained above, there is an unconnected compound acknowledgment here and the plaintiff, who made the acknowledgment, is under the burden of proving that the debt has ended in terms of the payment of 85,100.00 TL.

In terms of the payment made with the receipt bearing the description "debt", dated 02/05/2011, amounting to 8.000,00 TL; 457 et seq. of the Code of Obligations No. 818, which is in force as of the payment date. The money transfer regulated in the articles is a means of payment due to its legal nature. In other words, there is a legal presumption that the transfer was made for the purpose of paying an existing debt. The transferee who claims the opposite of the legal presumption is obliged to prove this claim (decree of the General Assembly of the Supreme Court of Appeals dated 12/03/2003, basis number 2003/3-118, decision numbered 2003/158). In the concrete case, by deducting the "debt" annotation while performing the transfer transaction, the contrary of the legal presumption has been proven by the transferee (defendant creditor) and it should be accepted that this transfer was made for the purpose of granting a loan, not for the payment of the debt. In this case; The plaintiff debtor has the burden of proving that the debt has ended in terms of payment of 8,000.00 TL.

In terms of payments made with receipts that do not contain a statement such as "debt" or do not contain an annotation with this meaning (other than the two receipts mentioned above); The defendant's claim that he sent the transfer, the reason for which was not specified, to be given as a loan to the plaintiff, was not accepted by the plaintiff; On the contrary, the payments are made as stated in the lawsuit and correction petitions; It has been argued that these are expenses made between people living together in the ordinary course of life. Thus, the plaintiff admitted that the money subject to follow-up was sent to him (the material fact), but argued that it was sent for another reason, not for the reason claimed by the defendant (as a debt), and stated that the legal nature of the fact was different from what was claimed. In this situation; It is clear that simple and compound confession is out of the question. Because the basic condition of both is; The alleged material fact and its legal nature are accepted together. There is no doubt that the confession here is a qualified confession. It has been explained above that a qualified confession cannot be divided, that is, the person making a qualified confession will not be under the burden of proof. Since the plaintiff's acknowledgment regarding receipts of this nature is in the nature of a qualified acknowledgment (reasoned denial), the burden of proof is on the defendant's creditor who alleges the fact. On the other hand, there is no hesitation in the evaluation to be made in terms of the legal presumption explained above regarding the transfer institution, when the burden of proof is on the defendant creditor (remitter). In other words, the defendant transferor has the burden of proving that the transfer was for a purpose other than the payment of an existing debt (the purpose of lending money to the plaintiff). " Y4HD. 2017/2049 K.

It is useful to explain again that while the unconnected compound confession is divisible, it is accepted that the connected compound confession cannot be divided. Another Supreme Court decision on the subject is shared below:

"The case is about a claim arising from machine repair. In the simple confession, the facts that form its subject are no longer controversial; Therefore, there is no need to prove these separately. In a qualified admission, although the existence of the material fact claimed by the other party is accepted, it is stated that its legal nature is different from what is claimed.

In a compound admission, the fact put forward by one party is fully accepted by the other party; In other words, although it is accepted that the fact is true and has the characteristics stated, a fact is added to the confession in such a way that this added fact either prevents the legal consequences of the admitted fact from arising or nullifies it. Compound acknowledgment is divided into two as connected compound acknowledgment and unconnected compound acknowledgment, depending on whether there is a connection between the fact that is the subject of the acknowledgment and the fact that is added to it.

With its defense, the defendant party accepted the material fact and the legal nature of the fact, but argued that the legal consequences of the admitted fact did not arise with an unconnected fact it added to its confession, in other words, that the plaintiff side did not have a right to receivable due to the repairs made. For this reason, the defendant's confession is an unconnected compound confession, and since this type of confession is divisible, the burden of proof has shifted and the defendant has assumed the burden of proof.

Considering that the defendant took on the burden of proof with his unconnected compound confession, the court did not find it right to erroneously make a decision regarding the burden of proof when it should have focused on the defendant's defense and made a decision based on the result to be achieved. For the reasons explained, the decision must be reversed." Y11 HD. 2021/6219 K.