Arama
Find the right precedent fast, without having to guess the right wording.
Search Yargıtay, Danıştay and appellate decisions by writing the question the way you would put it to a colleague. You do not need to know which chamber wrote it up in which words; Frontier matches the decision’s meaning, not its wording.
Comparison
How this differs from the official case law search
A portal matches words, we match meaning
The official Yargıtay case law search matches the words that made it into the decision. If the decision says "payment under protest" and you searched for "paid with a reservation", that decision does not exist as far as the portal is concerned. Two phrasings of one legal situation are two unrelated strings to a keyword index. Frontier lets you write the question the way you would put it to a colleague, and returns decisions reasoning about the same issue even when the wording differs.
A portal gives you a list, we give you the reasoning
The result of a portal search is a list of decisions that might be relevant. Working out which one helps means opening and reading all of them. Frontier states, beside each result, whether the decision supports your claim, weakens it, or is itself not yet final. The ranking chooses what you read, rather than you.
A portal shows one decision, we show the grounds
The weight of a decision depends on which chamber issued it, when, and what the Assembly of Civil Chambers said on the same question. On a portal you look each of those up separately. Frontier shows them with the citation and lets you open the full text to read the passage in context.
A portal finds what you searched for, we also find what you did not
The most expensive surprise is the decision you first see in the other side’s brief. Your own search terms will not surface case law against you, because you are not looking for it. Frontier reads your claim from both directions and puts the decisions the other side could use in front of you before you file.
Argument analysis and source verification
It is not enough for a decision to be relevant. It has to support your argument.
See where it stands on your argument
Whether the decision supports your point, weakens it, or has not itself become final. The verdict sits beside it.
Open the decision itself
Check the conclusion in the full text of the decision, not only in the AI’s reading of it. Every citation is one click away.
Verify the citation
The deciding authority, the date and the reference in one place, in the form you can carry straight into your filing.
The point argued
The Board reviews a notifiable acquisition on its own motion if it closes without clearance.
The citation was checked against the full text of the decision.
Deciding authority and date
Rekabet Kurulu
Reference
Rekabet Kurulu · 09-20/434-105 · 29/04/2009
Where it helps
Where this sits in the working day
- 01
The brief is written and the grounds are thin
Upload the brief you drafted. You see, claim by claim, which of your arguments case law supports and which are left hanging.
- 02
The other side relied on a decision
See what that decision says and what has been held the other way on the same question, together. Build the reply on the text rather than on a guess.
- 03
Chambers write the same thing differently
When the terminology shifted over the years, a keyword search misses the older decisions. Searching on meaning closes that gap.
Scope
Which courts you are searching
Yargıtay and Danıştay decisions, regional appellate (BAM) and regional administrative court decisions, UYAP Emsal, the Constitutional Court and regulatory board decisions, plus the body of legislation, in one case law search. Sources are crawled on a regular cycle, and when you open a decision you read its authority, date and citation off the decision itself.
Try it on a file of your own.
Start on the free plan, no card required. Run your first search as a real question and compare the result against the case law you already know.
Start free