Subsequent presentation of evidence in Civil Procedural Law

As a natural consequence of the principle of concentration, Article 145/1, p. 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) stipulates that no evidence may be in principle asserted or submitted after the time limit specified in the law. With this provision, which may also be referred to as the prohibition of subsequent presentation of evidence, the legislator aims to ensure that the evidence is asserted and submitted at the very beginning of the proceedings and thus, the evidence is collected at the very beginning of the proceedings. In this respect, the prohibition of subsequent presentation of evidence, which is stipulated based on the principle of concentration and the principle of judicial economy, is a kind of explicit limitation to the right of proof in terms of time. In order to eliminate the drawbacks that may arise in terms of the right of proof from the absolute and strict application of the time limits stipulated in the law regarding the assertion and submission of evidence and the prohibition stipulating that evidence cannot be asserted and submitted after these time limits, an exceptional provision has been stipulated in Article 145/1, p. 2 of the CCP regarding the subsequent assertion and submission of evidence with the permission of the judge, provided that certain conditions are met. In the first part of our study, which consists of three parts, the basic concepts of the law of proof, the provisions regarding procedural actions of the parties in the form of assertion and submission of evidence are examined. In the second part of the study, the prohibition of the subsequent presentation of evidence in the first instance proceedings, the scope of this prohibition, the opportunity of subsequent presentation of evidence foreseen in relation to this prohibition and the conditions of this opportunity are tried to be clarified. In the third and final part of the study, the issue of the assertion and submission of new evidence in the legal remedy stages has been tried to be analyzed. Finally, in the final part of the study, the relationship between the prohibition of the subsequent presentation of evidence and other institutions and special cases in the civil procedural law is examined.