Out-of-court dispute resolution methods may be preferred in practice due to the high workload of the courts performing the judicial function of the State and the risk of litigation processes to adversely affect commercial relations. Since the execution of the negotiation process within the scope of most of the aforementioned alternative dispute resolution methods will not prevent the running of the statute of limitations, to which the disputed receivable is subject, this may be a deterrent for the parties or create a time pressure in the negotiation process and prevent reaching the targeted reconciliation. In response to this concern, the amendments to the Swiss Code of Obligations allowed the parties, by their written agreements, to ensure that the statute of limitations does not run during settlement negotiations and other out-of-court dispute resolution negotiations. Since the scope of the written agreement mentioned in the relevant article is not provided by the legislator, it gives rise to different approaches and criticisms in the legal doctrine in line with the practical needs. Under Turkish law, a similar article has not yet been introduced; however, in practice, especially the waiver of the statute of limitations and the prohibition of abuse of the right to assert the statute of limitations may come to the fore in order to mitigate the risk faced by the negotiating parties.