KÜHEYLAN HUKUK
Legal Basis for Harm Not Payed by Liquidation, Incumbent Court, Periods and Evidence Strategy
This guide was updated as of November 1, 2026, on the basis of Capital Market Law No. 6362 and Law No. 7596.
A significant proportion of investors will not be able to receive all the money invested at the end of the liquidation, in funds that the SEC took into liquidation on 17 September 2026. Law No. 7596 brought in instruments such as interim payment and recovery account; however, these tools are limited to the fund's own assets.
The way the investor can apply for the remaining damage is to claim compensation against the fund managers, keepers, sellers and the administration that does not perform the audit duty when necessary. Since custody provisions apply to the relationship between portfolio management company and investor, the burden of proof is in the interest of the investor. The responsibility of the keeper is clearly regulated in the law. A one-year administrative application period is critical if it is on the path of full judgment against the CMB.
The liquidation payment is the division of the assets of the fund in the share ratio among the shareholders. Indemnity is the removal of personal damage suffered by an investor, fund managers or sellers due to their imperfect behavior.
Law No. 7596 distinguished these two paths. In the final payment, payments made earlier in "other legal ways" are deducted (m.4/5). The legislator thus accepted the existence of individual compensation claims, only preventing double payment.
The damage pen needs to be realistic when determining. Demanding a loss of earnings over the unit share price, which is claimed to be inflated by manipulation, is a legally weak ground. The stronger demand is the depreciation of that money, with the part of the de facto invested money that cannot be met after liquidation and recovery.
The investment fund is an asset without a corporate personality. The portfolio management company operates this asset on an investor account, on the basis of faithful property (SPKn m.52/1). The company is obliged to represent and manage the fund in a manner that protects the rights of its share holders (m.52/3).
Decisive judgment 52. It is the fourth paragraph of the article: 502 to 514 on the proxy contract of the Turkish Code of Obligations in cases where there is no special provision in the relationship between the portfolio management company and its shareholders. Substances are applied in comparison. This results in two outcomes for the investor:
• The measure is the discreet proxy. The company's behavior is assessed according to the care that a discreet proxy who undertakes similar work must take (TBK Art.506).
• Proof burden is in the investor's favor. The debtor is obliged to remedy the damage unless he proves it to be flawless (TCC Art. 112).
Portfolio management company SPKn m.52/4, m.55/6; TBK m. 506, m.112; 7596 s.K. m.5 Deviation from investment strategy, concentration in associated entity shares, valuation that does not reflect reality
Administrators TCC Art.553; TCO Art.49; 7596 s.K. m.5/2 Imperfect decisions and transactions, implicit value transfer
Portfolio storage agency SPKn m.56/1-c, f; m.56/2-3 Unit share value and lack of regulatory compliance control of the portfolio
Bank or intermediary institution selling the fund Investment services legislation; contract Appropriation testing, risk reporting, misleading marketing
SPK IYUK Art.2/1-b, M.13; Constitution Art.125 Heavy duty defect in supervision and inspection
Portfolio management companies are obliged to take care of the interests of the funds in their administration and their share holders (SPKn m.55/6). Types of violations expected to stand out in files in the current crisis include:
• Deviation from written investment strategy in the form of funding internal charter, statement and investor information
• Funds called the "money market" include assets that are incompatible with the low-risk nature of this type of fund
Law No. 7596 added a strong argument to this debate. The values transferred to the parties associated with unrequited or receivable transactions, which have no real economic purpose in accordance with the interest of the fund, even if the legislation is appropriate, are deemed unlawful from the assets of the funds. The portfolio management company is primarily responsible for this loss (m.5/1-2). The weakening of the financial strength of some companies following the crisis makes other rings of responsibility decisive.
Board members and managers are responsible for their damages against the company, shareholders and corporate creditors if they violate their obligations arising from the law and the articles of association with their defects (TCC Art. 553). If the verb is also a criminal offence, unfair verb liability (TBK Art.49) is also raised.
Law No. 7596 strengthened this responsibility in two ways. If the damage cannot be collected from the portfolio management company, the real and legal persons determined by the CMB and those acting with them shall be personally liable. Departing from office does not remove responsibility for operations during the term of duty (m.5/2). These receivables are followed in a manner that the TMSF will receive amme, and the collected amounts are transferred to investors through the recovery account.
The keeper is not a passive institution that only retains the assets of the fund. The law has entrusted him with the task of calculating the unit share value in accordance with the principles of valuation (m.56/1-c) and ensuring that the asset trading, portfolio structure and transactions of the fund comply with legislation and internal statutes (m.56/1-f).
The Keeper is responsible for the damage done to the shareholders due to their failure to meet these obligations (m.56/2). The law also reserves the right of the investor to file a lawsuit against the keeper (m.56/3). The holder's obligation to act independently of the portfolio management company and solely in the interest of shareholders (m.56/6) is also a measure in these cases. The fact that hiders are often financial high-powered organizations makes this way valuable in terms of collection ability.
The liability of the bank or intermediary institution, which markets its participation shares to the investor, arises from its own obligations. The main points to be examined are:
• Whether the risk profile of the investor is determined, whether the product conforms to that profile
• Whether the fund is presented with a discourse of "safe as deposit" or "guaranteed return"
The incumbent court may be controversial in this relationship. Whether the discrepancy between non-trafficking investor and bank is counted as consumer transactions is controversial in practice in capital market transactions for investment purposes. Since the lawsuit filed in the wrong court has resulted in a loss of time and expense, this preference must be made with caution before the case.
The failure of the administration tasked with overseeing and auditing the capital market to perform this task with grave negligence may be considered a service defect in administrative law. In this case, the road is a full-judgment lawsuit against the administration.
If the damage arises from an administrative action, the administration must be consulted before filing a lawsuit. This application must be made within one year from the date of learning the damage and, in any case, within five years from the date of action (Art. 13 of IDU). If the application is rejected or not answered in its deadline, the filing period begins to process. Given that the crisis was publicly reflected in September 2026, the pursuit of a one-year period is decisive.
The most difficult element in these cases is the tie of faith. The real perpetrator of harm is those who perform manipulation; the bond between the defect of administration and the damage must be established concretely. The SEC's statement that it has observed unusual price movements since the last quarter of 2025, and the request for an investigation permit on alleged misconduct by the former Chairman of the Board, are developments that may carry evidence value in establishing this bond. The general terms of the full judicial case are detailed in the guide "What is a Full Judicial Case?" in the Information Pool.
Investigation of offences in the Capital Market Law depends on the written application of the CMB; if a public case is filed, the Board shall win the title of participant in the case (SPKn Art.115).
In contrast, abuse of trust (SPKn m.110) and the investor's directly damaged adjective in qualified fraud claims can be defended more strongly.
The maximum value of the criminal file in terms of legal case is evidence. The CMB audit reports, MASAK reviews and expert reports are the main source in proof of defect and delicacy; the court of law may also issue a pending criminal case.
10. Durations: What Demand Drops?
Abort of the CMB decision SPKn m.134, IYUK m.7 60 days from the notification or announcement
A preliminary application for compensation against the administration IYUK m.13 1 year from learning, 5 years anyway
Indemnity based on unfair verb TBK m.72 2 years from learning, 10 years in any case; longer penalty timeout if the verb is a crime
In commercial cases and consumer disputes, it is a case requirement that he receive money and apply to the pre-trial mediator for compensation claims; the mediation process must also be included in the calendar.
11. Can a Mass Case be filed?
In Turkish law, there is no class action lawsuit (class action) in the meaning of American law. 113 of the Law on Legal Procedures. Only associations and other legal entities may file the community case under the article, which does not result in compensation being ruled.
In contrast, more than one investor based on the same legal reason can file a single lawsuit by forming an elder case friendship (HMK m. 57). For investors who have suffered losses in the same fund, this route is an efficient option in terms of expense and evidence management.
12. How to Prepare a Evidence File?
• Internal regulation of funds, disclosure and investor information form in force on the date of investment
Free accountant Murat Bey has invested TL 2,000,000 in a proposed money market fund with a "low risk, alternative to deposit" rating on his bank's mobile app. In the risk profile test, it is classified as a "responsive investor". The fund has been liquidated; it is understood that it will remain a deficit of about 700,000 TL following the interim payment and estimated final distribution.
The demand against the portfolio management company is based on the claim that the fund will be invested in assets that are incompatible with the nature of the money market, and the proof of excellence falls on the company under TCO Art. 112. In terms of concealer, it is investigated whether the portfolio's compliance with the internal statute is audited (SPKn m.56/1-f). Against the bank, an investor in a cautious profile will be examined for compliance and informational obligations to present the product as a "deposit alternative". The amounts to come from the pay-per-payment and future recovery account are deducted from the request; the case requirement is mediated and the two-year period in Article 72 of the TCO is put into calendar.
Is it necessary to wait until the liquidation is over for the compensation case?
The exact amount of the damage is evident at the end of the purge; however, compensation periods continue to operate in this process. Indeterminate receivable case (HMK Art. 107) is an option that preserves time in this case.
Would taking a break eliminate the right to sue?
Oh, no. The interim payment and liquidation payments received are deducted from the damage to be claimed; they do not terminate the right of litigation.
The bank that sold the fund says, "We were just intermediaries." No responsibility?
The fact that the bank is not responsible for the loss arising from the management of the fund does not remove its responsibility for its own sales and information obligations. These obligations are assessed according to concrete documents whether they have been violated.
Can a lawsuit be filed against the SEC?
A full judicial case may be filed against the administration if there is a connection between service defect and damage. A one-year administrative application period prior to the trial should not be missed.
Can investors who have suffered losses in the same fund sue together?
Yeah. For requests based on the same legal reason, elder case friendship is possible (HMK Art. 57).
• Waiting for liquidation only: Compensation and administrative application deadlines also work while liquidation is in progress.
• Turning to a single defendant: The sentence against a portfolio company whose financial power has been weakened may not be collected; the responsibility of the keeper and distributor must also be assessed.
• Counting the price of inflated funds as damages: Claims established over value on paper remain weak in the element of interest and loss.
• Losing marketing records: Application notifications and SMSes are deleted over time; screenshots should be kept dated.
• Skipping the mediation requirement: The case filed before the application to mediation is rejected from the procedure.
The mechanism of liquidation should not be expected to cover all damages in the fund crisis. For the remaining damage, the chain of responsibility between the portfolio management company, managers, keeper, distributor and, if necessary, administration must be established correctly, the right court must be elected, and the deadlines must be maintained. In these files, the result is often determined by evidence collected during the first months.
Küheylan Law Firm; establishment of legal basis for compensation claims of fund victims, preparation of evidence file, mediation and litigation processes and legal support to investors in full judicial applications against administration
Important Legal Notice: The statements, tables and fictional script contained in this guide were prepared by Küheylan Law Office for general information based on the current legislation and public official statements as of November 1, 2026. The text is not legal advice; the circumstances of each concrete event, contract documents and parties to the dispute may change the path to follow. In terms of durations, evaluation must also be made through the concrete file. © 2026 Küheylan Law Office.
KÜHEYLAN HUKUK