Council of State Administrative Litigation Chambers General Assembly (IDDK), E.2019/1122, K.2020/3344Residence Permit Renewal Periods Decision (July 2, 2020)

1. Case Information

  • Court: Council of State (Danıştay) Administrative Litigation Chambers General Assembly
  • File No. (Esas): E.2019/1122
  • Decision No. (Karar): K.2020/3344
  • Decision Date: July 2, 2020
  • Relevant Legislation:
    • Law No. 6458 on Foreigners and International Protection, Art. 31 (Residence Permit Renewal)
    • Regulation on Residence Permits, Art. 35 (Application Deadlines)

2. Background

Under Turkish law, foreign nationals holding a valid residence permit must apply for renewal before their permit expires. Law 6458 Art. 31(2) requires renewal applications “within the last sixty days of the permit’s validity period.” The implementing Regulation (Art. 35) further allows that if the renewal application is submitted on time, applicants maintain legal status until the decision is rendered—even if the permit technically expires in the interim.

In practice, some provincial directorates calculated the 60-day window backwards from the permit’s expiration date itself, rather than from the date the renewal application was filed or delivered. This led to confusion when postal/courier delays pushed delivery past the 60-day mark, resulting in unlawful refusals and status gaps.


3. Facts of the Case

A Syrian national residing in Izmir submitted her renewal application by registered mail 59 days before her residence permit’s expiration. Because the provincial directorate received the mail 62 days before expiry (courier delay), they deemed her application late and rejected it, ordering her to leave Turkey. She appealed administratively, arguing that the deadline should be measured by the posting/delivery date rather than the date of decision at the office.


4. Legal Issue

Should the statutory deadline for submitting a residence permit renewal application be calculated based on the date of postal/courier delivery to the competent authority, rather than the date the application is entered into the official registry?


5. Court’s Reasoning

  1. Literal Reading of the Regulation:
    • Regulation Art. 35(1) states applications “must be delivered” within the final 60 days. The verb “delivered” unambiguously refers to the moment the authority receives the file.
  2. Principle of Legal Certainty:
    • Counting from registry entry (which may be days later) creates an unpredictable applicant deadline, undermining foreign nationals’ ability to maintain status.
  3. Purpose of the Provision:
    • The renewal window aims to protect lawful stay continuity. Measuring from delivery date ensures applicants are not penalized for internal processing delays.

The General Assembly held that the delivery date is decisive, and any other interpretation would conflict with both the text and the protective intent of the regime.


6. Decision

The Council of State annulled the directorate’s rejection decision and remanded the matter, instructing that the applicant’s file be considered timely and that her residence permit renewal be processed on its merits.


7. Practical Implications for Foreign Nationals

  • Deadline Clarity: Applicants must ensure they obtain postal/courier proof (e.g., tracking slips) showing delivery within 60 days before expiration.
  • Status Continuity: Once timely delivery is established, applicants maintain lawful stay even if the permit expires while the application is pending.
  • Administrative Appeals: In case of rejection, include courier delivery records and cite this General Assembly decision.

8. How to Invoke This Decision in Practice

  1. Cover Letter: Reference E.2019/1122, K.2020/3344 and Regulation Art. 35(1).
  2. Evidence Bundle: Attach courier tracking logs indicating delivery date.
  3. Legal Submission: If refusal occurs, file an administrative appeal within 30 days, quoting the Council’s ruling to compel re-evaluation.

9. Conclusion

This landmark decision protects foreign nationals from losing status due to internal processing delays by clarifying that the renewal deadline is governed by the date of delivery of the renewal application—not subsequent registry actions. Such clarity strengthens procedural safeguards and ensures uninterrupted legal residence for applicants.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *