The investigation of the factual truth in Turkish procedural law

The idea underlying this study is to emphasize the necessity of handling dispute-related events in accordance with factual truth in order to bring about a fair result at the end of the trial. First of all, it must be explained in various aspects of the concept of trial. Judgment is the act of attributing a value in terms of etymological root. People try to make sense of people, actions, and even objects through some values. Judgment is the evaluation of the person who carried out the act of violation in terms of legal norms. In sociological perspective, judgment is the elimination of injustice through punishment. This definition makes it necessary to look closely at the question of the purpose of the judgment. Achieving the factual truth shown among the purposes of the trial is important because it serves the purpose of achieving justice. The factual truth in procedure law can be defined as an event which brought before the court in such a way as to leave no doubt in the past by means of the evidence. In our country where the principle of seperation in trial is exercised, there are some problems at the point of reaching factual truth because of different procedural rules in different branches of judiciary. Particularly because of the principles ruling in the civil procedure, it can be said that the trial does not serve the purpose of achieving factual truth. This situation has been addressed in our work through a comparative examination of the principles ruling all jurisdictions and the evaluation of some supreme court decisions. Key words: material fact, judgment, purpose of judgment, right, principles ruling in judgment