Limitation Periods for Commercial Debts in Türkiye: A Creditor's Guide to TCO Articles 146 to 161

This guide explains the creditor's side of Articles 146 to 161 of the Turkish Code of Obligations: the general ten-year period and the five-year list, when the period starts, interruption by acknowledgment, lawsuit, arbitration or enforcement proceedings, suspension during mandatory mediation, the effect on interest, joint debtors and sureties, the separate periods for bills of exchange, promissory notes and cheques, and why limitation must be raised by the debtor.

1. What Is the Limitation Period for a Commercial Debt in Türkiye?

Under Article 146 of the Turkish Code of Obligations (TCO, Türk Borçlar Kanunu, Law No. 6098), every claim is subject to a ten-year limitation period (zamanaşımı) unless the law provides otherwise. Article 147 applies five years to the claims it lists, and special laws, including the Turkish Commercial Code (TCC, Law No. 6102), set their own periods for particular instruments and contracts.

For a foreign supplier, lender or service provider owed money by a company in Türkiye, the first question is therefore which rule the claim falls under. The Code’s answer starts with the general rule and then checks the exceptions. Article 147 lists the following claims as subject to five years:

1. rent, interest on principal (anapara faizleri) and other periodic payments such as wages;
2. charges for accommodation at hotels, motels, guesthouses and holiday villages, and for food and drink at restaurants and similar places;
3. claims arising from small craft work and small-scale retail sales;
4. claims arising from a partnership agreement between partners, or between partners and the partnership, and claims between the managers, representatives or auditors of a partnership and the partnership or its partners;
5. claims arising from mandate, commission and agency contracts, and from brokerage contracts other than the claim for a commercial broker’s fee;
6. claims arising from a contract for work, except where the contractor failed to perform its obligations at all or properly through gross fault.

A claim that does not fall under one of these items, or under a special provision, stays with the ten-year rule in Article 146. Whether a particular claim fits an item depends on the item’s words and the contract behind it, and the court assesses it.

The periods are fixed. Under TCO Article 148, the limitation periods set in this division of the Code (the division on limitation) cannot be changed by contract. TCC Article 6 adds that limitation periods in laws containing commercial provisions cannot be changed by contract unless the law provides otherwise. Under TCO Article 160(1), limitation cannot be waived in advance. A clause in a supply or loan agreement that tries to lengthen or shorten these periods is therefore read against these provisions.

2. The Main Periods Side by Side

The table sets out the periods discussed in this guide, using only the words of each provision.

Two points follow from the table. First, the instrument a creditor holds can change the period: a promissory note or a cheque carries its own shorter periods under the TCC, while the underlying sale or loan has its own period under the TCO. Second, a judgment changes the period again: under TCO Article 156(2), a debt decided by a court or arbitral award starts a new period that is always ten years.

3. When Does the Limitation Period Start to Run?

Under TCO Article 149(1), limitation starts to run when the claim falls due (alacağın muaccel olmasıyla). Under Article 149(2), where the claim’s falling due depends on a notice, limitation starts from the day on which that notice could have been given.

Periodic payments. Under Article 150(1), for life annuities and similar periodic payments, limitation for the whole claim starts on the day the first unpaid periodic payment fell due. Under Article 150(2), if the whole claim is time-barred, the unpaid periodic payments are time-barred too.

Counting. Under Article 151(1), the day on which limitation starts is not counted, and limitation is complete only when the last day of the period has also passed without the right being exercised. Under Article 151(2), the provisions on calculating time limits for performance of obligations also apply to limitation periods.

Interest and accessory claims. Under Article 152, when the principal claim becomes time-barred, the interest and other claims attached to it are time-barred as well. Interest on principal also appears in Article 147, item 1, among the claims subject to five years. A creditor should therefore check two things for each invoice: the period for the principal and the period for the interest, which may end earlier.

Set-off. Under Article 139(3), set-off with a time-barred claim may be raised only if the claim was not yet time-barred at the moment when set-off could have been made. Where the debtor also has claims against the creditor, this date can matter as much as the limitation date itself.

4. What Interrupts the Limitation Period, and What Happens Next?

Under TCO Article 154, limitation is interrupted (kesilir) in two groups of cases: the debtor’s acknowledgment and the creditor’s formal steps. With the interruption, a new period starts (Article 156(1)).

The debtor’s acknowledgment (Article 154, item 1). Limitation is interrupted if the debtor has acknowledged the debt, in particular by paying interest, making part performance, giving a pledge or providing a surety. The words “in particular” show that these are examples. Whether a particular letter, e-mail or statement is an acknowledgment is a question of its content, and the court assesses it.

The creditor’s steps (Article 154, item 2). Limitation is interrupted if the creditor has:

1. applied to a court or an arbitrator by way of an action or a defence;
2. started enforcement proceedings (icra takibi); or
3. filed with the bankruptcy estate (iflas masası).

A demand letter (ihtarname) is not among these acts; a notice can matter for the start of limitation where falling due depends on it (Article 149(2)).

The new period (Article 156). Under Article 156(1), the interruption starts a new period. Under Article 156(2), if the debt was acknowledged in a document (senetle ikrar) or decided by a court or arbitral award, the new period is always ten years. Whether a given document is an acknowledgment in a document within this paragraph is a question for the court.

Running again during proceedings (Article 157). Under Article 157(1), limitation interrupted by an action or defence starts to run again after each procedural act of the parties and each decision of the judge during the case. Under Article 157(2), limitation interrupted by enforcement proceedings starts to run again after each act relating to the pursuit of the claim. Under Article 157(3), limitation interrupted by filing with the bankruptcy estate starts to run again when the claim can be requested again under the bankruptcy provisions. For a creditor, the dates of the steps in the file therefore keep mattering after the interruption.

A dismissed action (Article 158). If an action or defence is dismissed because the court lacked jurisdiction or competence, because of an error that could be corrected, or because it was brought too early, and limitation or a time limit that extinguishes the right (hak düşürücü süre) expired in the meantime, the creditor may exercise its rights within an additional period of sixty days.

Joint debtors and sureties (Article 155). Under Article 155(1), interruption against one joint and several debtor, or against one debtor of an indivisible obligation, also interrupts limitation against the others. Under Article 155(2), interruption against the principal debtor also interrupts it against the surety (kefil). Under Article 155(3), interruption against the surety does not interrupt it against the principal debtor. A creditor that sues only the guarantor should therefore take a separate step against the principal debtor.

5. When Does the Limitation Period Stop Running?

Suspension (durma) is different from interruption. Under TCO Article 153(1), in the listed cases limitation does not start, or if it has started, it is suspended; under Article 153(2), it starts or continues to run at the end of the day on which the cause of suspension ends. Interruption starts a new period; suspension pauses the existing one.

Grounds in the TCO. Items 1 to 4 of Article 153(1) concern claims during parental authority, guardianship (including claims against the State arising from guardianship acts), marriage and domestic service. Items 5 to 7 can arise in commercial files:

1. while the debtor has a usufruct over the claim (item 5);
2. while it is not possible to assert the claim before the Turkish courts (item 6);
3. where the capacities of creditor and debtor merge in one person and the merger later ceases with retroactive effect, until that situation arises (item 7).

Whether a particular situation means that the claim cannot be asserted before the Turkish courts is a question for the court.

Mandatory commercial mediation. For commercial cases on a sum of money, TCC Article 5/A(1) makes applying to a mediator before filing a condition of the action in actions for a receivable, compensation, annulment of an objection, negative declaration and restitution. Under Article 18/A(15) of the Mediation Law (Hukuk Uyuşmazlıklarında Arabuluculuk Kanunu, Law No. 6325), from the application to the mediation office until the final minutes are drawn up, limitation is suspended and time limits that extinguish the right do not run. The Law says suspended, not interrupted: the time already run before the application still counts (TCO Article 153(2)). Under Article 18/A(18), the rules on mediation as a condition of the action do not apply where a special law requires arbitration or another alternative dispute resolution route, or where there is an arbitration agreement. A creditor whose contract contains an arbitration clause therefore checks this exception before relying on the suspension; applying to an arbitrator interrupts limitation under TCO Article 154, item 2.

Insolvency of the debtor. Under EBL Article 194(1) (Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law, İcra ve İflas Kanunu, Law No. 2004), civil actions to which the bankrupt is a party are stayed, subject to the exceptions in that paragraph; under Article 194(2), while the action is stayed, limitation and time limits that extinguish the right do not run. Under EBL Article 294(1), which sets out the effects of the definitive concordat moratorium (kesin mühlet) for creditors, limitation and time limits that extinguish the right that can be interrupted by an enforcement act do not run during the moratorium; under EBL Article 288(1), the temporary moratorium (geçici mühlet) has the effects of the definitive one.

6. Bills of Exchange, Promissory Notes and Cheques

Negotiable instruments (kambiyo senetleri) have their own limitation rules in the TCC, and they sit alongside the period for the underlying commercial claim.

Bills of exchange. Under TCC Article 749(1), claims under the bill against the acceptor become time-barred three years from maturity. Under Article 749(2), the holder’s claims against the endorsers and the drawer become time-barred one year from the date of a protest drawn up in time, or from maturity where the bill contains the clause “return without costs”. Under Article 749(3), an endorser’s claims against other endorsers and the drawer become time-barred six months from the date on which the endorser paid the bill or the bill was asserted against it by action.

Promissory notes. Under TCC Article 778(1)(h), the limitation provisions in Articles 749 to 751 also apply to promissory notes, so far as consistent with their nature. Under Article 779(1), the maker of a promissory note is liable like the acceptor of a bill of exchange. The period in Article 749(1) for claims against the acceptor is therefore the one to check for claims against the maker.

Cheques. Under TCC Article 814(1), the holder’s rights of recourse against the endorsers, the drawer and the other parties liable on the cheque become time-barred three years from the end of the presentation period. Under Article 814(2), the rights of recourse of one party liable on the cheque against another become time-barred three years from the date on which that party paid the cheque or the cheque was asserted against it by action.

Interruption on instruments. Under TCC Article 750, limitation is interrupted by bringing an action, making a request for enforcement, giving notice of the action (davanın ihbarı) or filing the claim with the bankruptcy estate. Article 751(1) provides that the act interrupting limitation has effect only against the person in respect of whom it was made, and Article 751(2) that a new period of the same length starts. These rules differ from TCO Article 155(1) on joint debtors and from the ten-year new period in TCO Article 156(2). Article 818(1)(p) applies Articles 750 and 751 to cheques.

After the instrument is time-barred. Under TCC Article 732(1), even where the drawer’s or acceptor’s obligations under a bill have lapsed through limitation or because the steps needed to preserve rights under the bill were neglected, they remain liable to the holder to the extent they may have been enriched at the holder’s expense. Under Article 732(4), that claim has a limitation period of one year from the day after the bill became time-barred, and the burden of proof lies on the party claiming that it was not unjustly enriched. Articles 778(1)(d) and 818(1)(m) extend Article 732 to promissory notes and cheques.

For the fast-track enforcement route on these instruments, see our guide to enforcement on promissory notes and bills of exchange.

7. After a Judgment and Inside Enforcement

Enforcement on a judgment. Under EBL Article 39(1), enforcement based on a judgment (ilama müstenit takip) becomes time-barred ten years from the last act in the proceedings. Under Article 39(2), enforcement based on a notarial deed is subject to the limitation periods set in the law of obligations or the commercial laws, according to the nature of the deed.

Certificate of insufficiency. Under EBL Article 143(1), where the creditor has not received the whole claim and the conditions for issuing a certificate of insufficiency (aciz vesikası) are met, the enforcement office issues one for the remaining amount. Under EBL Article 143(2), the certificate has the character of a document containing an acknowledgment of the debt. Under Article 143(4), no interest can be claimed on the amount written in it. Under Article 143(6), the debt becomes time-barred against the debtor twenty years after the certificate is issued; the debtor’s heirs may raise limitation if the creditor has not pursued its right within one year of the opening of the succession.

Keeping the file alive. Under TCO Article 157(2), limitation interrupted by enforcement starts to run again after each act relating to the pursuit of the claim. The debtor’s objection and the creditor’s routes against it are explained in our guide to removing a debtor’s objection in Turkish enforcement.

8. Limitation Must Be Raised: The Debtor’s Defence and the Other Kind of Time Limit

Under TCO Article 161, the judge cannot take limitation into account of its own motion unless it is raised. Limitation is therefore a defence for the debtor to raise; if it is not raised, the judge does not apply it.

The Code also keeps a second category apart from limitation: time limits that extinguish the right (hak düşürücü süre). The statutes name the two side by side in several places: TCO Article 158 grants the sixty-day additional period where “limitation or a time limit that extinguishes the right” expired; Article 18/A(15) of the Mediation Law says that limitation is suspended and such time limits do not run; EBL Article 194(2) stops both from running while an action is stayed, and EBL Article 294(1) stops both from running during the concordat moratorium where they can be interrupted by an enforcement act. Article 161 is written for limitation only. Whether a given period in another statute is a limitation period or a time limit that extinguishes the right follows from that statute’s own wording, and the court assesses it.

Waiver. Under TCO Article 160(1), limitation cannot be waived in advance. Under Article 160(2) and (3), a waiver by one joint and several debtor, or by one debtor of an indivisible obligation, cannot be asserted against the others, and under Article 160(4), a waiver by the principal debtor cannot be asserted against the surety.

Security over movables. Under TCO Article 159, securing a claim with a pledge over movable property (taşınır rehni) does not prevent limitation from running for that claim; the creditor nevertheless keeps the power to recover from the pledge.

9. A Checklist for a Foreign Creditor

The provisions above lead to a short set of questions for each unpaid commercial claim.

1. Identify the rule. Is the claim under the ten-year rule of TCO Article 146, an item in Article 147, or a special provision such as TCC Article 101 or the instrument periods in Articles 749 and 814?
2. Fix the due date. Limitation starts when the claim falls due, or from the day on which a required notice could have been given (TCO Article 149); the first day is not counted (Article 151(1)).
3. Check the interest separately. Interest on principal is in the five-year list (TCO Article 147, item 1), and it falls with the principal (Article 152).
4. Look for acknowledgments. Interest payments, part payments, pledges or sureties given by the debtor interrupt limitation (TCO Article 154, item 1); a debt acknowledged in a document starts a new ten-year period (Article 156(2)).
5. Choose an interrupting step in time. A lawsuit, arbitration, enforcement proceedings or filing with the bankruptcy estate interrupts limitation (TCO Article 154, item 2); a demand letter is not on that list.
6. Account for mediation. For commercial money claims, mediation comes before the action (TCC Article 5/A(1)), and limitation is suspended from the application until the final minutes (Mediation Law, Article 18/A(15)); these rules do not apply where a special law requires arbitration or another alternative dispute resolution route, or where there is an arbitration agreement (Article 18/A(18)).
7. Cover every debtor. Interruption against the principal debtor reaches the surety, but not the other way round (TCO Article 155); on bills, promissory notes and cheques, an interrupting act has effect only against the person it concerns (TCC Article 751(1)).
8. Keep the file moving. Limitation interrupted by enforcement runs again after each act relating to the pursuit of the claim (TCO Article 157(2)).

These steps sit inside a wider collection strategy. Our overview of debt collection and enforcement in Türkiye explains how the routes connect, and our debt collection practice page describes how we act for foreign creditors. Sellers based in Germany will find how the CISG, the payment order and mediation fit together for them in our overview for German sellers and other clients in Germany.