SUMMARY
Speech acts theory is not about words, phrases or sentences which are mainly used as units of interaction between people, but basically about actions that are achieved through such utterances. 'Speech acts theory' belongs to the realm of Pragmatics. In this study, selected stretches of discourse of two court speeches are highlighted. These trailers emerge in a formal setting in the presence of an authority who makes judgments on disputes and claims. They are analyzed based on Searle's view of illocutionary act to find out types of direct and indirect speech acts that are employed by interlocutors in court trials. The study shows that there is little difference between the uses of the two acts depending on the speaker's role. Directives, declaratives and other acts are used by those who are in authority while assertives are employed by those who are to answer questions given by the former.