Case for Correction of the Civil Registry Record

What is a case for the correction of the civil registry record?

As is well known, in our country, the civil registry information of each individual is organized and recorded by the Population Directorate. In order for a person to exercise their personal rights derived from the Civil Code, a lawsuit must be filed to correct material errors made by the Population Directorate or to determine the child’s lineage. The corrected or changed civil registry record contributes to the legal interests of the parties, especially in matters of lineage and inheritance.

What information can be changed through a lawsuit for the correction of the civil registry?

It is possible to file a lawsuit for the correction of the civil registry to make changes in matters such as changing the first name and surname, gender change, correction of birth date and age, annulment of civil registry, paternity, denial of lineage, religious conversion, missing persons (absence), information resulting from personal status records, age change, and changing the names of the mother and father.

Changes in first name and surname can occur either through marriage or at the person’s request. We will discuss the details of gender change later in our article. It is also possible to change the incorrect birth date recorded in the civil registry through this lawsuit. We will also address in detail the issues of paternity and denial of lineage in our article. The issue of “missing persons” will be filed within 1 year in cases where the person is presumed dead due to an event likely to lead to death, while in cases where a person cannot be contacted but death is not conclusively certain, the lawsuit will be filed within 5 years.

Who are the parties in a civil registry correction lawsuit?

The person against whom the civil registry correction is requested and the interested parties with legal interests, or the relevant Civil Registry Directorate, may be the parties to the lawsuit. It is an accepted practice in the established case law of the Court of Cassation to designate the Civil Registry Directorate as the defendant.

Where is the civil registry correction lawsuit filed?

In a civil registry correction lawsuit, the court of first instance with jurisdiction and authority is the Civil Court of First Instance located in the plaintiff’s place of residence. Individuals living abroad must file this lawsuit in the Civil Courts of First Instance in Ankara, Istanbul, or Izmir.

What is the statute of limitations for a civil registry correction lawsuit?

Since the civil registry correction lawsuit concerns matters arising from rights strictly associated with the individual, it is not subject to any statute of limitations. It can always be filed.

What are the differences between a paternity lawsuit, a denial of paternity lawsuit, and a civil registry correction lawsuit?

A paternity lawsuit is filed by the mother or child with the request to establish paternity, against the person who denies being the father. If the defendant is proven to be the father in the paternity lawsuit, the court rules that the defendant is the father of the child born out of wedlock.

If the male spouse claims the child is not his, he can file a denial of paternity lawsuit to refute the presumption of paternity. A denial of paternity lawsuit is filed against the mother and child.

As can be seen, in a paternity lawsuit, the goal is to prove that the person is the father, whereas, in a denial of paternity lawsuit, the male spouse attempts to prove that he is not the father.

A request to register the biological father in the civil registry means denial of paternity, and this lawsuit should be filed in the Family Court, not the Civil Court, as a civil registry correction lawsuit.

What is the lawsuit for the change of civil registry due to gender change?

The gender change lawsuit consists of two stages. In the first stage, the individual who meets the necessary conditions applies to the court to file a lawsuit for gender change permission. After the acceptance of this lawsuit and the necessary medical procedures, the gender change occurs. After the gender change, the second stage will involve a name change. The gender change lawsuit can be filed with a name change request, or it can be filed as a result of the judgment of the first lawsuit.

Court rulings related to the case of correcting the population registry.

T.C. COURT OF CASSATION 8th CIVIL CHAMBER E. 2019/5440 K. 2021/3370 Dated 12.04.2021

REQUEST FOR CORRECTION OF POPULATION RECORDS (In light of the claims that the mother and father listed in the child’s record are not the biological parents, and that the real mother is another person, the case falls under Article 36 of the Population Services Law No. 5490, and thus the case must be heard in the Civil Court of First Instance with the participation of the Population Directorate Representative.)
ERROR IN POPULATION REGISTRY (As the request is, in its entirety, for the correction of a record that has been wrong from the outset due to false statements, the case falls under Article 36 of the Population Services Law No. 5490, and the case must be heard in the Civil Court of First Instance with the participation of the Population Directorate Representative.)
JURISDICTION (The court should have issued a decision of lack of jurisdiction and sent the case to the Civil Court of First Instance in relation to the claims that the child’s registered mother and father are not the biological parents, and that the real mother is another person – It was deemed incorrect to make a decision without considering this issue.)

5490/m.36

SUMMARY: The case concerns the request for the correction of population records.

In terms of the claims, the case falls under the scope of Article 36 of the 5490 Population Services Law, which concerns the correction of population records. In cases concerning the correction of population records, the participation of the Population Directorate representative is required, and the case should be heard in the Civil Court of First Instance. It was deemed incorrect not to consider that a decision of lack of jurisdiction should be made to refer the matter to the Civil Court regarding the claims that the child is not the child of the parents listed in the population register and that the real mother is another person. Therefore, the decision of the Regional Court of Appeal to reject the appeal on the merits should be overturned, and the decision of the First Instance Court should be annulled.

CASE: In the case between the parties, as explained above, the Ankara 16th Family Court ruled to dismiss the case on procedural grounds with its decision dated 06.11.2018, numbered 2018/47, 2018/146. After the plaintiff’s attorney appealed the judgment, the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Ankara Regional Court of Appeal ruled to reject the appeal on the merits. The plaintiff’s attorney subsequently appealed the Regional Court of Appeal’s decision, and the file was reviewed by the chamber, and the necessary actions were considered.

DECISION: In the petition, the plaintiff’s attorney stated that the child Edanur, who appeared as the joint child of the defendant Umut and Nazmiye (R.’s sister), was born from the non-marital relationship between R. and the defendant. They requested the correction of population records for Edanur and the determination of paternity, as well as the determination of paternity for the child E. who was registered in R.’s single household.

After the Family Court’s examination, the case was dismissed on procedural grounds due to the lack of special authority regarding paternity determination in the submitted power of attorney and the failure to correct the deficiency within the given period. The plaintiff’s attorney’s appeal was rejected on the merits by the Regional Court of Appeal. The decision to reject the appeal on the merits was subsequently appealed by the plaintiff’s attorney.

Based on the content of the file, the case documents, the trial records, and the existing evidence, the Court made its decision after evaluating the evidence, and there is no error in its evaluation. Therefore, the remaining appeals outside the scope of the following paragraph are not found to be valid.
Article 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100, which concerns the determination and nature of the court’s jurisdiction, states that the jurisdiction of the courts can only be regulated by law, and since the rules related to jurisdiction are of public order, this matter must be automatically considered by the courts at every stage of the trial.

Under the Code of Civil Procedure (HMK), it is the judge’s responsibility to provide the legal characterization of the facts, while explaining them to the parties.

The primary issue to be resolved is whether the case concerns the denial of lineage-paternity or the correction of civil registry records. As is known, lineage refers to the relationship between individuals of the same descent, and this concept must involve not only biological ties but also legal relations; in other words, the biological connection must meet the conditions required by the legal system. According to Article 282 of the Turkish Civil Code, the lineage between a child and the mother is established by birth, while the lineage between a child and the father is established through marriage to the mother, acknowledgment, or a court ruling. Lineage can also be established through adoption. Additionally, under laws concerning the correction of the lineage of children born from unions that do not derive from a marriage act, which are commonly referred to as amnesty laws, lineage may also be established (Supreme Court General Assembly Decision 30.01.2008, No. 2008/2-36-47). The lineage between a child and the mother is automatically established by birth, and since no ruling is required to establish this, the issue of identifying the woman who gave birth to the child can be the subject of the lawsuit, rather than establishing the maternal lineage.

On the other hand, according to Article 36/1 of the Turkish Civil Code, personal status is determined by the official registry kept for this purpose. Pursuant to Articles 39 of the same Code and 35/1 of the Population Services Law, no record in the civil registry can be corrected or amended in any way unless a final court judgment exists. However, material errors made during the registration of events in the family register can be corrected by the civil registry office in accordance with the supporting document.

Record correction refers to the amendment or modification of part of the record registered in the family register. To correct inaccurate records in the civil registry, a court decision is required. At this point, inaccurate records in the population register can be adjusted to reflect the actual situation through a record correction lawsuit filed by the relevant parties. In practice, this lawsuit is referred to as the “correction of the population register.” In cases related to the correction of population records that are not subject to the statute of limitations or time-barred periods, all types of evidence can be used (Supreme Court General Assembly Decision 11.02.1998, No. 2-87/77).

Although the paternity denial case and the record correction case show similarities in terms of outcomes (such as removing from the household), they are governed by their own specific provisions in terms of content and procedural rules. In a paternity denial case, the information in the population record regarding personal status is correct and has been registered in the registry. However, this truth later becomes a technical error through the paternity denial lawsuit. In a population record correction case, the issue is that the population record does not reflect the actual situation and was originally entered into the registry incorrectly (Supreme Court General Assembly Decision 30.01.2008, No. 2008/2-36-47).

Lawsuits regarding corrections of population records fall outside the scope of Article 4 of Law No. 4787 and do not fall under the jurisdiction of family courts. In lawsuits concerning the correction of population records, which fall under the jurisdiction of civil courts, it is mandatory for the population director or official to be present and for the decision to be made in their presence, as stipulated by Article 36 of the Population Services Law.

In the present case, one of the claims made is related to the cancellation of the population record of minor …, which was created based on a false statement, and the determination that the real mother is the plaintiff, …, and the request for the correction of the population record accordingly.

Considering the explanations provided above; since the paternity is established by birth between the mother and the child, and since …’s real mother is …, and the claim that … is not the real father, these requests, in their entirety, are related to the correction of a record that has been wrong from the beginning due to a false statement. Therefore, the case regarding these requests falls under the scope of the population record correction case, as regulated by Article 36 of the Population Services Law No. 5490. In a population record correction case, the issue is that the fact documented by the official record is incorrect and was originally entered into the registry incorrectly. Lawsuits regarding the correction of population records, as regulated in Article 36 of the Population Services Law No. 5490, are heard in the civil court with the participation of a representative from the Population Directorate.

Considering the explanations above, it was deemed inappropriate for the court not to consider issuing a jurisdictional decision to send the case to the Civil Court, as the claims regarding the child not being the child of … and …, and the real mother being …, were related to the correction of a false population record. Therefore, the decision of the Regional Court of Appeal to dismiss the appeal should be overturned, and the decision of the First Instance Court should be annulled.

CONCLUSION: For the reasons explained above, the decision of the Regional Court of Appeal is REVOKED in accordance with Article 373/1 of the Civil Procedure Law No. 6100.

Court of Cassation 8th Civil Chamber, Decision No. 2017/7945 E., 2018/17302 K., dated 15.10.2018:

“… as stated in the decision of the Court of Cassation’s General Assembly of Civil Law, dated 30.01.2008, No. 2008/2-36-47, the case concerns the correction of a record because the fact documented in the official registry is incorrect and was originally entered into the registry as incorrect. Even if, as a result of such a case, the person whose record is to be corrected is to leave the household in which they were registered and be registered in another household, it does not transform the case into a paternity case.”

Court of Cassation 8th Civil Chamber, Decision No. 2017/8217 E., 2019/284 K., dated 14.01.2019:

“In the petition, the plaintiffs’ attorney claimed that their deceased relative’s name appeared as the daughter of … in the population registry, and argued that the real mother was …, requesting a correction of the population records. The court, noting that … was deceased, rejected the case. Since the plaintiffs’ inheritance rights were affected, it was understood that they had legal standing to request the correction of the records, and thus had active legal capacity. The court should have examined the substance of the case and issued a decision instead of rejecting the case for an unjustified reason.”

Court of Cassation 17th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2014/11217, Decision No. 2014/17316, dated 01.12.2014:

“…In the case regarding the correction of the population records between the parties, separate jurisdictional decisions were made by the Family Court and the 1st Civil Court of First Instance. As the case was sent to determine the proper jurisdiction, all documents in the case file were examined and necessary considerations were made.”

-DECISION-

The case concerns the plaintiff’s request for the correction of the mother’s name in the population record.

The Family Court ruled on lack of jurisdiction, stating that the request for the correction of the father’s name was not related to paternity but to the correction of the population record.

The Civil Court of First Instance also issued a ruling on lack of jurisdiction, reasoning that the case concerned the correction of lineage.

In the present case, although the plaintiff’s real mother is …, she argued that her mother and father were not legally married, and that her name was written as the daughter of …, who was the relative of her grandfather. She requested the correction of her mother’s household to be listed as ….

This case, by its nature, is not a paternity case, but a case related to the correction of an erroneous population record. According to Article 36 of the Law No. 5490 on Population Services, cases regarding the correction of population records that are not related to the establishment of paternity, as regulated in Articles 282 and following of the Turkish Civil Code, must be seen and concluded by the Civil Court of First Instance based on general provisions.

CONCLUSION: For the reasons explained above, in accordance with Articles 21 and 22 of the Law No. 6100 on Civil Procedure, it was unanimously decided on 01.12.2014 to determine the jurisdiction of the 1st Civil Court of First Instance.