Options to Identify Another Party’s Asset Position

Under Turkish law, options to search for the assets of another party are limited due to data protection concerns. It is possible to obtain information from the Turkish Land Registry regarding the owner of an immovable asset or limitations imposed on a relevant asset provided that an interest can be shown to the officials. Attorneys at law are allowed to search for immovables using an online portal of the Union of the Turkish Bar Associations (UHAP). Otherwise, assets belonging to an individual or a company can only be searched for through authorised state institutions (eg, enforcement offices) according to specific procedures. 

Authorised State Institutions That May Search for Assets of a Party and Requirements to Conduct an Asset Search

There is no publicly available information for third parties who wish to search for the assets of another party without any justifiable reason. The only way to search for assets of another party is to file an application to court or enforcement offices proving that there is a need to search for and seize the assets. More specifically, it is possible to file a lawsuit requesting injunctive relief in the form of a preliminary attachment against the relevant party before the courts. Provided the application is accepted, it is possible to initiate an asset search via the responsible enforcement office in order to enforce injunctive relief and attach the counterparty’s assets. If the conditions for injunctive relief are not met it is necessary to wait until the completion of the lawsuit to obtain an enforceable title.

Turkish law also allows the initiation of enforcement proceedings without a lawsuit. If the debtor does not object to the debt, it is possible to obtain an enforceable title without going through lengthy court proceedings.

Once the enforceable title is granted, it can be enforced. The creditor can then apply to the enforcement office to conduct an asset search. The enforcement office will typically contact banks for account details and the land registry for property information. It is also possible to write to third parties (via the enforcement office) who may be indebted to the debtor in order to attach the debtor’s receivables.

In criminal law matters, criminal courts may search for and seize the assets of an accused party. Further, there are specific regulations related to receivables of government institutions, which allow institutions such as banks, tax offices, land registries to search for and seize the assets of a debtor party without having to apply to a court or enforcement office.

Freezing Orders and Asset Disclosure Orders in Turkish Law

Türkiye enacted Act No 6415 on Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism for the Ratification of the “International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism” dated 1999 and Act No 7262 on Preventing the Financing of the Spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction, enabling the imposition of freezing orders on the assets of persons involved in funding terrorism and the application of UN sanction measures relating to the spread of weapons of mass destruction.

Freezing orders in Türkiye are issued by the Turkish Presidency and published in the Official Gazette of Türkiye. The orders are issued against individuals or entities who have been sanctioned by the United Nations Security Council. The list of individuals and entities whose assets have been frozen is accessible online at resmigazete.gov.tr.

Apart from the situations described above, there are no regulations regarding asset disclosure or freezing orders.

Types of Domestic Judgments

Interim decisions and final decisions

In Turkish Law, there are two types of general domestic judgments: interim decisions and final decisions. Interim decisions are procedural judgments given during the course of a case (for example, summoning witnesses, assigning experts for examination, or providing a period for claimant to adjust partial claims), Final decisions, however, are substantive judgments that rule on matters like jurisdiction, judge recusal, or resolve the merits of a case in a final and binding manner.

Temporary Legal Protection

Applications to courts are not always in the form of lawsuits. In certain circumstances, an individual may seek court orders with temporary effects to prevent potential losses of rights, a concept known as “temporary legal protection”.

Temporary injunction

Temporary injunction provides legal protection to the application where:

• the exercise of a right becomes significantly difficult;
• the exercise of a right becomes impossible;
• there is a disadvantage due to a delay in exercising the right; and
• there is a risk that any delay in exercising the right could lead to substantial damage.

If any of these conditions apply, the applicant may request an injunction from the relevant court, which could involve actions such as preventing the sale of assets to avoid malicious disposal of assets, etc. This injunction can be sought from the relevant court either before a lawsuit against the opposing party is initiated, during the filing process, or after the lawsuit has been filed.

Preliminary attachment

In scenarios where a monetary claim is made and there is uncertainty about whether the debt will be paid to the creditor, the claimant can petition the relevant court for a preliminary attachment of the debtor’s assets. For the court to grant a preliminary attachment, the debt must be due and credible evidence is needed to demonstrate valid reasons for the attachment of the respondent’s assets. Furthermore, the claimant must deposit a guarantee to cover any potential damages the respondent might suffer if the attachment is ultimately found to be legally unjustified.

Judgments Basing on Types of Lawsuits

Judgments for specific performance

A judgment for a specific performance mandates the respondent to perform a specific action or to abstain from performing a specific action. Examples include judgments for the collection of a receivable or an injunction preventing the respondent from entering a specific property.

Declaratory action

A declaratory judgment provides legal affirmation of a certain factual situation, right, or document. This can include judgments from a (negative) declaratory lawsuit demonstrating that the claimant is not indebted, or from a declaratory lawsuit confirming the existence of a document or situation before it becomes corrupted or disappears.

Constitutive judgments

Constitutive lawsuits aim to create, alter, or abolish a legal situation. For instance, a judgment from a divorce lawsuit is constitutive as it alters the marital status of the involved parties. Similarly, a judgment from a lawsuit concerning a name change, which alters the claimant’s identity information, is also constitutive.

Enforcement of Domestic Court Judgments

Enforcement of domestic judgments can be initiated after the court renders its judgment. In most cases, it is possible to enforce the decision of the court of first instance without having to wait for its finalisation; in this case, the respondent can stop the enforcement by depositing a security in the amount of the debt plus three months’ interest (eg, a bank letter of guarantee, cash) to the enforcement office. For the enforcement of judgments rendered on matters such as ownership of immovables, enforcement of foreign court judgments, determination of lease amounts, the claimant must wait for the judgment to be finalised before beginning the enforcement procedure.

The enforcement procedure varies according to the type of judgment, as outlined below. 

Enforcement of pecuniary judgments

To enforce a pecuniary judgment, the steps outlined below must be taken.

• The court of first instance must render the “final” judgment. After rendering the final judgment, a reasoned decision must be issued by the relevant court. The reasoned decision is issued after issuance of the (short) final decision and includes details of the claim, defence, evidence collected during the investigation phase, the decision and its legal basis.
• The claimant, having received the reasoned decision, must prepare an “enforcement request” and present it to an enforcement office. The creditor initiating the enforcement is named the “creditor”, while the opposing party is the “debtor”, regardless of whether the debt is justified.

• The enforcement office issues an enforcement order, which is then communicated to the debtor.
• The debtor is given a seven-day period by the enforcement office to either pay the due amount or provide a decision on suspending the enforcement. This decision is granted upon presenting a security in the form of a bank letter of guarantee that guarantees the amount subject to enforcement plus three months’ interest or a cash deposit in the same amount.

• The debtor has no right to challenge and stop the enforcement. However, the debtor can suspend the enforcement if they appeal the judgment. The suspension will only be granted by the enforcement office if the appeal meets the conditions set forth above, and it will only last until the appeal process is complete. Upon completion of the appeal process, should the decision be annulled and referred back to the court, the enforcement proceedings will be halted. Under such circumstances, the Enforcement Office is obliged to refrain from taking further actions until the local court issues a new judgment. Conversely, if the Court of Appeal affirms the judgment, the enforcement proceedings will continue, and the guarantee amount will be transferred to creditor’s account. Additionally, a new writ demanding the payment of any remaining interest will be issued and served on the debtor. If the debtor fails to settle this remaining amount, the creditor reserves the right to proceed to the next stages of the enforcement process. On the other hand, if the debtor pays the requested amount, the amount will be transferred to the creditor and the enforcement file will be closed.
• If the debtor does not pay the amount or applies for the suspension of enforcement within seven days from the service of the enforcement order, the file becomes “final” and the creditor will have the right to search for and seize the debtor’s assets. If the debtor still does not pay, the creditor will have the right to request the sale of the attached assets from the enforcement office, and the proceeds from the sale of the assets will be transferred to the creditor.

Settlements and acceptances made before courts, and notarial deeds, including acknowledgement of debt, bail bonds for appeal to district courts of appeal and appeal to the Court of Cassation, and bail bonds in the enforcement office, can be executed subject to the provisions on the enforcement of judgments set forth above. Execution sureties shall be deemed joint and several sureties.

For the sake of completeness, it should be mentioned that under Turkish law there is the possibility to initiate enforcement for the creditor of a pecuniary or security claim even if the creditor does not hold a final court judgment in its favour. The creditor must submit an enforcement request (a standard form) to the competent enforcement office. Within three days of the submission of an enforcement request, the enforcement office must issue a payment order, which is to be served on the debtor. The debtor can either pay the debt or challenge it in order to stop the enforcement.

If the debtor challenges the payment order within seven days of the receipt of such order, the enforcement shall stop. In this case, the creditor has two legal avenues:

• file for the dismissal of the debtor’s enforcement challenge in the appropriate civil court within one year of the debtor’s notification that it is challenging the order; or
• seek the annulment of the enforcement challenge in the competent enforcement court within six months of the debtor's notification that it is challenging the order.

The first option operates like any typical civil proceeding. The second option is exclusively available to creditors who can prove their claims with irrefutable evidence like government-issued documents, a promissory note bearing the debtor’s confirmed signature, or one issued before a notary public. Without such evidence, the creditor is limited to filing a lawsuit for the dismissal of the debtor’s enforcement challenge in the commercial courts.

The advantage of initiating enforcement prior to filing a civil lawsuit, as opposed to filing a civil lawsuit directly, is the imposition of an “enforcement denial compensation” on the debtor. This compensation is set at 20% of the principal debt if the debtor disputes the debt, which is then lifted by a civil court or an enforcement court. Conversely, if the creditor’s enforcement attempt is unsuccessful, they are liable to pay compensation to the debtor of an equal amount (ie, 20% of the principal debt).

Enforcement proceedings related to non-pecuniary receivables

If the creditor wishes to enforce a judgment related to non-pecuniary receivables, the process is similar to the one involving monetary receivables. Types of enforceable non-pecuniary receivables are as follows:

• delivery of movable assets;
• delivery of immovable assets;
• easement rights;
• child custody or visitation orders; and
• taking, or refraining from taking, particular actions.

Delivery of movable assets

Delivery of movable assets is enforced differently depending on whether the movable asset is in the debtor’s possession. If the asset is in the debtor’s possession, the enforcement office grants a period of seven days to the debtor to deliver the relevant asset to the enforcement office. If the debtor does not deliver the movable asset, the enforcement office will use force to obtain the asset from the debtor. If the asset is not in the debtor’s possession, the enforcement office will enforce to obtain the amount of the relevant asset’s monetary value from the debtor.

Delivery of immovable assets

If the claimant obtains a judgment related to the delivery of an immovable asset (and registered ships), prior to the initiation of the enforcement, the court will automatically notify the final judgment to the relevant registry office, without the need for the claimant to file such a request. The relevant registry office will add an annotation to the records of immovable asset regarding the court’s decision.

Subsequently, the creditor will request the delivery of the immovable asset by initiating enforcement and presenting an enforcement request to the enforcement office. The enforcement office will give the debtor seven days to deliver the immovable asset. If the debtor refuses to vacate and deliver the immovable asset, the bailiff will enforce the delivery of the asset and the debtor will be sentenced to imprisonment by the enforcement court. If the debtor agrees to deliver the asset, the bailiff will take possession of the asset and deliver it to the creditor.

If the immovable asset is in the possession of a third party, the enforcement depends on whether the third party possessed the asset prior to or after the relevant judgment. If the third party possessed the asset during the lawsuit, the creditor has the same rights against the third person as against the debtor. The creditor can also initiate a compensation lawsuit against the debtor. If the third person obtained possession after judgment, the enforcement office will obtain the asset from whoever possessed it, if necessary by force. 

Easement rights

If the claimant obtains a decision from the relevant court regarding the establishment or removal of an easement right, the claimant will initiate enforcement at the enforcement office to compel the debtor to establish or remove the easement right. If the debtor refuses to comply with the enforcement order, the enforcement office will complete the official procedure for the annotation of the easement right.

Child custody and visitation orders

Since 4 August 2022, the “Regulation on the Execution of Decisions and Measures Regarding Child Custody and Visitation” came into force. As per the said regulation, judgments on child custody and visitation are subject to the authorisation of Forensic Support and Victim Services Directorate, which consists of officials who are expert in the field of child psychology.

Judgments ordering a debtor to take, or refrain from taking, a particular action

Judgments regarding specific performance concern situations where the court orders the debtor to take, or refrain from taking, a particular action. The process is similar to proceedings pertaining to the delivery of movable assets, except that the debt does not convert into a monetary value if the debtor fails to fulfill the order. The enforcement office will try to get the debtor to take the action stipulated in the court judgment. In some situations, it may be impossible to force the debtor to refrain from taking a particular action. In this case, the debtor could be forced to compensate for damages arising from the action (for example, disclosure of confidential information).

Insolvency

Bankruptcy proceedings can either take the form of direct or non-direct proceedings. 

Non-direct bankruptcy proceedings

If a creditor wishes to pursue non-direct bankruptcy proceedings against a debtor, the first step is the request for payment of the debt through the competent enforcement office. The enforcement office will then serve a bankruptcy payment order to the debtor. If the debtor does not pay and does not challenge this payment order within seven days following its service, the creditor may file a bankruptcy lawsuit before the commercial court within one year of the service of the bankruptcy payment order by filing a bankruptcy request in respect of the debtor.

If the debtor challenges the bankruptcy payment order, the bankruptcy proceedings will be suspended. In this case, the creditor will be required to file a bankruptcy lawsuit before the commercial court within one year of the service of the bankruptcy payment order by filing a request for the removal of the enforcement challenge and a bankruptcy request in respect of the debtor. Before examining the merits of the bankruptcy request, the court initially examines the merits of the enforcement challenge. If the court decides to dismiss the enforcement challenge, the court may proceed with the bankruptcy request. The court would grant the debtor seven days to deposit the full amount of the debt (the Depot Decision). If the debtor does not pay the debt within the indicated time limit, the court would have to declare the debtor bankrupt.

Within 15 days of the announcement of the court’s decision to proceed with the bankruptcy request in the Trade Registry Gazette, other creditors of the debtor may challenge the debtor’s bankruptcy (this is particularly relevant in cases where the debtor did not challenge the payment order in order to avoid situations of fraudulent bankruptcy by the debtor and the creditor requesting the bankruptcy). If the challenges of the other creditors are found reasonable, before proceeding to the Depot Decision, the commercial court would grant a depository injunction and order the debtor to make payment (or deposit) of the debt, along with interest and expenses, within seven days of such order. The commercial court would then notify the debtor that the court will declare its bankruptcy if the ordered payment is not made. If the debt is paid or deposited to the court within this seven-day period, the court will reject the bankruptcy request. Otherwise, the court will declare the debtor bankrupt in the first hearing following the order. An appeal against such decision can be filed before the competent regional court of appeal, and subsequently before the Turkish Court of Cassation.

Once a bankruptcy decision is issued by the commercial court, the decision is conveyed to the competent bankruptcy office. The bankruptcy offices are the administrative authorities responsible for carrying out bankruptcy proceedings. The bankruptcy office announces the bankruptcy to creditors and third parties and also notifies related persons and entities (ie, creditors that previously commenced enforcement against the debtor, trade registries, professional organisations etc) of the debtor’s bankruptcy.

Direct bankruptcy proceedings

A request for the bankruptcy of the debtor can be made directly to the commercial court without initiating any bankruptcy proceedings with the enforcement office, if any of the following conditions listed in Article 177 of the Execution and Bankruptcy Law are met:

• the debtor has no known address;
• the debtor tries to hide their assets in order to avoid payment;
• the debtor conducts or attempts to conduct fraudulent acts that infringe on the creditors’ rights;
• the debtor hides its assets during enforcement;
• the proposed restructuring of debts (konkordato) is not approved;
• the debt could not be paid through enforcement of a court judgment;
• a previously approved debt restructuring agreement is terminated or the company violates its debt restructuring plan; or
• it can be assumed, based on the available evidence, that none of the aforesaid conditions to file for the bankruptcy of the borrower or guarantors have been met.

A bankruptcy decision of a commercial court is subject to appeal before the competent regional court of appeal and subsequently before the Turkish Court of Cassation.

There are different types of enforcement costs and fees paid directly to enforcement offices. Payment of fees and expenses is required to proceed to different stages of proceedings.

Enforcement Fees

Enforcement fees are paid directly to the enforcement office and collected by the state. Some of fees must be paid by the creditor and some by the debtor.

Application fee

An application fee is a fixed fee paid by the creditor when initiating the proceedings, which increases once a year.

Advance fee

An advance fee is paid by the creditor in the amount of 5% of the debt amount in pecuniary enforcement proceedings.

Enforcement fulfilment fee

An enforcement fulfilment fee is collected in non-monetary proceedings upon completion of the proceedings.

Central enforcement fee

This fee, which amounts to 2% of the debt amount, is collected in enforcement proceedings arising from subscription agreements.

Collection fee

A collection fee is collected from the debtor if he/she pays the debt amount in full or partially.

Prison fee

A prison fee can be collected from creditors, which amounts to 2% of the debt amount, after completion of collection.

Waiver fee

A waiver fee is collected from the creditor if the creditor states before the relevant enforcement office that he/she wishes to waive the debt, which is half of the collection fee. If the creditor waives the debt after the sale of the assets, 100% of the collection fee is collected from the creditor.

Enforcement Expenses

Expenses are paid to the enforcement office to keep the enforcement proceedings pending. If the creditor does not pay the relevant expense to the office, it will not be processed by the enforcement office. The enforcement expenses include, for instance, notification expenses for the service of enforcement order, sale expenses for the initiation of an asset sale.

Another type of expenses is attorney fees. Attorney fees are payable to the counsel of the creditor if they are represented in the proceedings, and vary depending on their rates.

Timeframe for Enforcement Proceedings

The time it takes to enforce a judgment depends on numerous factors. In some cases, the service of payment order takes a long time (for example, when a debtor is not found at their address or the address has changed and the new address is not known).

Although it is hard to give an exact timeframe, in normal conditions it takes up to approximately two weeks to serve a payment order on a debtor. Including the seven-day period granted to debtors for payment/suspension, it takes nearly a month to finalise a payment order. The sale of assets and payment to the creditor can take from a few months to a year, as the assets are appraised through an expert examination, and the issuance of a valuation report can take months.

Upon the creditor’s request, the enforcement office contacts the relevant authorities (eg, registries, banks) to find the assets of the debtor.

Debtors can employ various strategies to prolong enforcement proceedings and delay payment. These strategies commonly include evasion tactics such as avoiding the receipt of judgments and payment orders. Frequently, challenging the actions of enforcement offices before enforcement courts serves as a method to delay enforcement proceedings. The basis for contesting the actions of enforcement offices may include:

• unlawful actions taken by the enforcement office;
• actions of the enforcement office contradicting the facts;
• failure to fulfill a right; and
• obstruction of the enforcement of a right.

A challenge must be lodged within seven days of discovering the grounds for such a challenge. While the enforcement court must reach a decision within fifteen days, the actual timeline can extend to three to six months if the enforcement court schedules a hearing. Decisions of enforcement courts can be appealed before the responsible regional court of appeal, but such an appeal does not halt the enforcement of the judgment.

Under Turkish Law, declaratory judgments that do not contain a performance clause cannot be enforced.

Furthermore, the following categories of judgments must become final (following an appeal process) in order to be subject to enforcement proceedings:

• judgments on family and personal law;
• judgments on immovable property and real rights;
• judgments on fixing period of service;
• judgments on determination of rental cost;
• judgments on enforcement of foreign court judgments;
• judgments on negative declaration lawsuits or reclamation lawsuits;
• judgments issued by the Court of Accounts;
• provisions of criminal court judgments regarding trial expenses and compensation;
• judgments on replevin lawsuits; and
• judgments regarding ships.

In Turkish Law, all lawsuit and enforcement files are recorded in the National Judiciary Informatics System (Ulusal Yargı Ağı Bilişim Sistemi or UYAP) and accessible to citizens and lawyers through e-Signature and e-Devlet systems. Even if a file is closed, it is stored in the online system and it is impossible to remove the registration of the file. However, only parties and their counsel can access the records of the execution/court files to which they are party.

It is possible to search within the courthouse system whether any court or enforcement proceedings are pending or have been closed against an individual or a legal entity. Searches can be conducted based on a Turkish citizenship number for individuals, or based on a company name or tax number for legal entities. If any court or enforcement proceeding (pending or closed) is identified, it becomes possible for legal counsel to review physical court files, if available.

In order to enforce foreign court judgments in Türkiye, an enforcement lawsuit must be filed. The conditions for filing an enforcement lawsuit are specified in Code No 6718 on International Private Law and Procedural Law (IPLPL). According to Article 90/5 of the Constitution of the Republic of Türkiye, international agreements have the force of law in Türkiye, taking precedence over ordinary laws. As a result, if bilateral agreements (eg, judicial assistance agreements) exist between Türkiye and a foreign state (whose courts have rendered the judgment), any specific provisions regarding the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments within these agreements must be complied with. 

Also, the Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (“Hague Service Treaty”) is relevant when it comes to assessing due notice of the claim and the judgment subject to enforcement in the course of the enforcement proceedings.

In the absence of a special treaty applicable to the enforcement of foreign court judgments, Articles 50 to 59 of the IPLPL apply to the recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments. According to Article 54, the competent court shall decide on enforcement subject to the following conditions:

• There is legal or de facto reciprocity between Türkiye and the state where the judgment was rendered.
• The judgment must not be in a matter that is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Turkish courts. This means that the judgment cannot be about immovable property, membership or partnership relations within legal entities limited to such relations, insolvency and bankruptcy, inheritance, intellectual property, labour law, consumer protection, or insurance. If the defendant objects, the judgment also cannot be from a court of a state that recognises jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case or the parties, even if the court has no real relationship with them.
• The judgment is not clearly contrary to public order.
• As per the laws of the jurisdiction where the judgment was rendered, the party against whom enforcement is sought was either not properly summoned or represented before the court, or the judgment was rendered in their absence in contravention of those laws, or such party has not challenged the enforcement request before the Turkish court based on one of the aforementioned reasons.

Among the aforementioned conditions, the condition regarding compliance with Turkish public order is worth careful assessment as it is frequently raised by respondents in enforcement proceedings. As a result, the Grand Chamber for Unification of Jurisprudence of the Turkish Court of Appeal ruled in its judgment No 2010/1E. 2012/1K that the assessment shall be carried with reference to “the core values of Turkish law, Turkish general ethics and good manners, indispensable principles that form the basis of the Turkish legal order, the fundamental rights and freedoms set forth in the Turkish Constitution, common and accepted legal principles applicable internationally, bilateral treaties, principles of justice and ethics commonly accepted by developed societies, level of civilisation, economic and political regime”. According to the Turkish Court of Appeal, “an enforcement cannot be rejected for reasons such as breach of mandatory provisions of Turkish law”. The reasoning of the foreign court judgment is subject to the laws of the state where the judgment is rendered, and the reasoning itself or its absence does not amount to a breach of public order.

Furthermore, pursuant to Article 48 of the IPLPL, foreign natural and legal persons filing a lawsuit, participating in a lawsuit or pursuing enforcement proceedings before a Turkish court must deposit a security, whose amount is determined by the court. However, an exemption may be applicable in case of reciprocity. This applies to foreigners who file a recognition and enforcement action in Türkiye. In the decision of the 12th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation No E. 2022/9782 K. 2023/2740 dated 25 April 2023, it is stated that in cases where reciprocity is not in question, even if a security is deposited for the recognition and enforcement of a lawsuit, it is possible to collect a new security in an amount that will not restrict the creditor’s freedom to exercise their rights in enforcement proceedings involving a judgment.

Some judgments rendered by foreign courts are subject to recognition or enforcement procedures in Türkiye. Foreign court judgments that are not enforceable are subject to recognition procedures in Türkiye, while enforceable judgments require an enforcement action to be filed in order to be enforced. However, it is possible to enforce not only court decisions rendered in foreign countries, but also decisions related to divorce rendered by the administrative authorities of foreign countries according to the Regulation on the Implementation of Civil Registration Services, if they are enforceable. With the exception of the exception mentioned in 3.1 Legal Issues Concerning Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, there is no distinct difference in approach.

The following categories of judgments are not enforceable in Türkiye:

• judgments rendered on criminal law matters (except for the provisions related to personal rights in criminal judgments);
• judgments rendered on tax and administrative law matters;
• interim decisions;
• summary judgments;
• judgments rendered in civil cases in which a Turkish court has exclusive jurisdiction (eg, matters related to immovables, membership and partnership issues within legal entities, insolvency and bankruptcy, inheritance, intellectual property, labour law, consumer protection and insurance);
• foreign court judgments that violate Turkish public order (the concept of public order is interpreted narrowly under the established jurisprudence of the Turkish Court of Appeal; see 3.1 Legal Issues Concerning Enforcement of Foreign Judgments); and
• judgments rendered in proceedings where the respondent was not duly summoned to the proceedings, or judgments were not duly notified to the respondents.

An enforcement lawsuit is filed before the competent civil court of first instance. In commercial matters, the competent court would be a commercial court. The competent court of first instance is determined according to the territorial jurisdiction rules in the Code of Civil Procedure. Accordingly, the request for the enforcement of the court judgment may be filed to the court at the place of residence of the person against whom enforcement is sought in Türkiye, or if there is no place of residence or settlement in Türkiye, at one of the courts In Ankara, Istanbul or Izmir. The original of the award rendered by the foreign court, the document showing that the award of the foreign court has become final, the apostille annotation, the certified translation of the award subject to enforcement must be filed. The enforcement proceedings are conducted according to the simple trial procedure, where only one round of written submission, encompassing the claim statement and the defendant’s response, is envisaged. It is expected that the court of first instance will complete the hearing of the parties, evidence examination, and investigation procedures in two hearings, excluding the preliminary examination hearing. The interlude between hearings typically does not exceed a month unless necessary. The appeal procedure is the same as the appeal procedure for ordinary court judgments. As such, the enforcement decision made by the court of first instance can be appealed to the competent regional court of appeal if the judgment’s amount surpasses TRY41,710.20. If the judgment’s amount exceeds TRY238,735,737, the decision can be appealed to the Turkish Court of Cassation following the regional court of appeal’s review.

The costs to be paid in the enforcement of foreign court judgments vary according to the value of the claim. According to Article 4 of the Law of Fees, the application fee specified in the Judicial Fees Tariff and the proportional fee, which is based on the value of the judgment, will have to be paid for the enforcement of foreign court decisions. As of 2023, the application fee is TRY269.85 and the proportional fee is 0.6831% of the value of the judgment. A quarter of this amount is collected at the filing of the claim. The remaining three quarters is charged by the tax office if the claimant is not successful with the enforcement proceedings. The duration of enforcement cases varies according to the workload of the court but can be concluded in a period of two to 12 months depending on the approach of the parties and the workload of the court.

The following arguments to challenge enforcement are available depending on the circumstances:

• the judgment subject to enforcement is not yet final;
• the lack of reciprocity between Türkiye and the state where the judgment was awarded;
• the subject matter of the judgment falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of Turkish courts, or the court that delivered the judgment has no significant connection to the case;
• the enforcement of the judgment would be against Turkish public order; 
• the respondent was not correctly summoned to the proceedings before the (foreign) court that ruled against them, or was inadequately represented before such court, or the foreign court’s final judgment was improperly served on the respondent; or
• the claimant has no interest in the enforcement (for instance, because the claimant has fully recovered the awarded sum through enforcement proceedings or a settlement reached in another jurisdiction).

A foreign arbitral award; ie, an arbitral award rendered by a tribunal located outside of Türkiye, can be enforced pursuant to the international treaties that may be applicable or, in their absence, pursuant to the provisions of the IPLPL (Articles 60–63). Türkiye is a member of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the “New York Convention”). If the country in which the arbitral award was rendered is a member of the New York Convention, the enforcement of such award shall be subject to the provisions of the New York Convention. 

An arbitral award rendered by an arbitral tribunal located in Türkiye is qualified as a local arbitral award and is not subject to enforcement proceedings that a foreign arbitral award is subject to in order to be finally binding. A final local arbitral award can be executed directly pursuant to the execution procedures that apply to local court judgments. However, their execution can be stopped if annulment proceedings have been filed against such award until the annulment proceedings are finalised.

The main issues regarding the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards relate to the length of the proceedings. Enforcement proceedings are subject to three instances (court of first instance, appeal before the regional court of appeal, and appeal before the Court of Cassation following review by the competent regional court of appeal) and, depending on the workload of the court and the complexity of the matter, it may take around three and a half to four years to enforce a foreign arbitral award in Türkiye. Freezing orders are possible in exceptional cases, for instance, if there is concrete evidence that the respondent is preparing to hide their assets.

Depending on the length of the proceedings and the amount of the award, the costs of enforcing a foreign arbitral award may be considerable. It is necessary to submit a notarised Turkish translation of the award as well as a notarised translation of the arbitration agreement (or the main agreement which also contains the arbitration agreement). Each of these agreements is subject to a stamp tax charged at the notarisation stage in the amount of 0.948%. The upper limit of the stamp tax for each document is TRY10,732,371.80 as of 2023.

There is no obligation to deposit a security for matters concerning enforcement of arbitral awards.

Türkiye is a member of the New York Convention. If the arbitral award is rendered by a tribunal seated in a country which is also a member of the New York Convention, enforcement shall be pursuant to the rules of such convention. If the tribunal is not seated in a country that is a member of the New York Convention, any bilateral treaty between such a state and Türkiye and which applies to the enforcement of arbitral awards would apply. In the absence of such a bilateral treaty, the relevant provisions of the IPLPL would apply. The conditions of enforcement under the IPLPL are comparable to the conditions of enforcement under the New York Convention.

According to Turkish law, not all disputes can be submitted to arbitration. These include criminal law disputes, tax and administrative law disputes, disputes that pertain to the determination of the rent amount, eviction of a leased property, and labour law disputes, disputes regarding the ownership of, or other real rights in respect of, immovable property, and divorce matters. Consequently, any awards issued in these categories are unenforceable.

A lawsuit is required for the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award. This lawsuit should be filed at the court of first instance in line with the general rules prescribed by the Civil Procedural Code to determine the competent court. Typically, this would be the court at the place of residence of the party against whom the lawsuit for the recognition and enforcement is filed in Türkiye. In most cases, the court of first instance will receive an opinion from a court-appointed expert assessing whether the conditions of enforcement have been met. The decision of the court of first instance is subject to appeal before the regional court of appeal provided that the monetary thresholds are reached. The decision of the regional court of appeal is subject to appeal before the Court of Cassation if the monetary threshold (currently TRY238,735,737) is reached.

Given that enforcement matters are subject to three instances, it takes from three and a half to five years to enforce a foreign arbitral award. This process can take even longer if, for instance, the Court of Cassation reverses the decision of the first two instances and the matter is sent back to any of these lower courts. There has been extensive debate about whether the court fees for enforcing arbitral awards should be fixed or proportional to the arbitral award’s amount. In a relatively recent judgment (No 2017/930 E. 2019/812 K), the Court of Cassation ruled that the court fees must be fixed. Currently, fixed court fees are TRY269.85 for the application fee and the judgment fee.

he following arguments can be used to challenge the enforcement of arbitral awards, depending on the circumstances:

• the award subject to enforcement is not yet final as setting aside proceedings are still pending before the courts of the state where the arbitral award was made, or as the case may be, the award has been annulled;
• there is no valid arbitration agreement;
• the arbitral award is contrary to public morality or public order;
• the subject matter of the award is not subject to arbitration under Turkish law;
• the respondent was not duly represented before the arbitral tribunal;
• the respondent was not duly informed of the selection of the arbitrators or was deprived of the opportunity to defend themselves;
• the arbitration agreement, the selection of the arbitrators or the procedure applied by the arbitrators is not in accordance with the law to which the arbitration proceeding is subject; or
• the subject matter of the award relates to a matter that is not within the scope of the arbitration agreement, or has been annulled by the competent authority of the place where it was rendered.

The above-mentioned conditions also exist in the New York Convention. In addition, under the New York Convention, the incapacity of the parties to the arbitration agreement also constitutes grounds for challenging the enforcement of the foreign arbitral award.