NEGATIVE DETERMINATION LAWSUIT (Exchange Rate – Allegations of Fraud)

TO THE
ISTANBUL (…) PRIMARY COMMERCIAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY*
(If the enforcement is based on a negotiable instrument, the competent court is the Primary Commercial Court.)

PLAINTIFF:
Name and Surname (Turkish Republic Identity Number …) – Address

REPRESENTATIVE:
Attorney Ferhat Küle – Address

DEFENDANT:
Name and Surname (Former Spouse) – Address

SUBJECT OF THE CASE: Determination that the defendant is not liable for the debt subject to enforcement proceedings based on a promissory note obtained through fraud (Article 72 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law); determination of the promissory note's invalidity and its return; suspension of the enforcement proceedings by means of a provisional measure (preventing the transfer of payments to the creditor/preventing further seizures) ; imposition of court costs and attorney fees on the defendant; and, if the conditions are met, compensation for bad faith/wrongful enforcement .

EXPLANATIONS

1. Parties and Process: The defendant is the plaintiff's ex-spouse. The parties' marriage was terminated by the decision of the … Family Court, case number … E., … K., dated …/…/20… (the divorce decree is attached).

2. Obtaining the Promissory Note (Fraud): During the marriage, the defendant abused the trust between the spouses and persuaded the plaintiff to sign a blank promissory note or one whose contents were filled in later , using false statements such as "bank/transaction form," "loan approval," and "debt restructuring." The plaintiff later learned that the note was drawn up as a negotiable instrument and that the amount section was filled in by the defendant. After the divorce, the defendant initiated enforcement proceedings based on this note through the ... Enforcement Office, file number .../... E.

3. Absence of Underlying Relationship / Lack of Consideration: There is no underlying debt relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant that would form the basis of the promissory note . The signature obtained through the abuse of family trust constitutes a declaration of intent tainted by fraud within the meaning of Article 36 of the Turkish Code of Obligations . The defense of invalidity/lack of consideration can be raised against the person in the position of the first payee/defendant . The conditions of coercion, deception, and subsequent addition of content are present in the note, and the negotiable instrument obligation has not been validly created .

4. Evidence: WhatsApp messages, email records, witness statements, divorce case file contents , graphological traces of the filling in the promissory note, and expert examination will be presented as evidence supporting the claim of fraud . There are no accounting/current account records showing that the plaintiff owes the defendant any amount .

5. Need for Late Protection Against Enforcement Proceedings: The defendant is acting in bad faith after the divorce and initiating enforcement proceedings. To prevent irreparable harm during the ongoing proceedings, it is necessary to issue a precautionary measure (preventing the payment of funds from the enforcement office to the creditor, and halting seizure and sale proceedings) in accordance with Article 72 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law and Articles 389 et al. of the Code of Civil Procedure, against appropriate security .

LEGAL REASONS

• Article 72 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (Negative determination/restitution; provisions on precautionary measures and compensation)

• Code of Civil Procedure, Articles 389 et seq. (Interim injunctions)

• Turkish Code of Obligations Article 36 (Fraud), Turkish Code of Obligations Article 27 (Absolute Invalidity)

• Turkish Commercial Code Article 776 et seq. (Promissory note – mandatory elements, completion, bill of exchange commitment)

• Relevant Supreme Court precedents ( established decisions stating that the defenses of underlying relationship/fraud/lack of consideration can be raised against the first holder of a negotiable instrument ; and that the validity of a negotiable instrument undertaking can be questioned in cases of abuse of family trust).

EVIDENCE

1. ... Family Court divorce decree numbered .../... E., .../... K. and the contents of the file.

2. … Enforcement Office …/… E. (bill of exchange enforcement file)

3. Original/copy of the disputed promissory note , delivery chain/presentation records.

4. WhatsApp/email conversations, SMS messages, call logs

5. Witnesses: (… ​​TC …), (… TC …)

6. Graphology/document analysis expert (filling/post-writing; pen-ink discrepancy; signature-text discrepancy)

7. Bank records, current account, business ledgers (to prove the absence of a debt relationship)

8. All kinds of legal evidence.

REQUEST FOR PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES

ongoing bill of exchange enforcement proceedings, Article 72 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law and Articles 389 et al. Civil Procedure , security deemed appropriate will be provided;

• The fact that the money deposited into the enforcement office was not paid to the defendant,

• Failure to proceed with seizure and sale proceedings ,

• We request that a preliminary injunction be issued to temporarily halt the enforcement proceedings
  

CONCLUSION and REQUEST

For the reasons explained above;

1. The court ruled that the plaintiff is not liable (negative determination) for the debt subject to enforcement proceedings numbered …/… E. of the … Enforcement Office, based on a promissory note obtained by the defendant through fraud .

2. Determination of the invalidity and return of the disputed promissory note ,

3. Our request for a preliminary injunction has been granted in exchange for appropriate security, thus halting the enforcement proceedings and preventing payment at the treasury.

4. If the defendant is found to be at fault, compensation for bad faith/wrongful pursuit shall be awarded in accordance with Article 72 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law .

5. The court costs and attorney's fees shall be borne by the defendant

We respectfully request and demand that a decision be made.

Plaintiff's Attorney
, ...
(Istanbul Bar Association, Registration No: ...)
Date: .../.../20...