Money handed over at contract formation is presumed to prove that a contract was made — not to buy a right to walk away — and a promise to sell land is void unless drawn up by a notary. This guide explains when a deposit must be returned, on what legal basis, within what period, and before which forum.
In most cases a kapora paid for Turkish property can be recovered if the sale falls through. A sale of land, and a promise to sell land, are valid only in official form (Article 237 of the Code of Obligations), and money paid on an invalid or failed ground must be returned as unjust enrichment (Article 77). A walk-away deposit (Article 178) lets the seller keep the money only where it was agreed as part of a valid contract; a walk-away clause in an informal reservation form falls with the form. The rest of this guide explains how each of those rules works.
Turkish law does not use the word kapora. Money handed over when a contract is made is treated by Article 177 of Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 as bağlanma parası — evidence that the contract was concluded, not the price of a right to walk away — and, unless the contract or local custom says otherwise, it is deducted from the principal debt. A party may withdraw by forfeiting what was paid, or by returning double what was received, only where a cayma parası was actually agreed under Article 178. In a property transaction one further rule governs everything else: a sale of land is valid only in official form, and a promise to sell only if drawn up by a notary in “düzenleme” form (Article 237 TBK; Article 89 of Notaries Law No. 1512). Where that form is missing there is no valid ground to keep the money, and the refund claim rests on unjust enrichment (Article 77). The position below is as at September 2026.
What is a kapora in Turkish law?
The term is market usage, not legislation. The Code regulates two distinct things. Bağlanma parası (Article 177) is money paid at the making of a contract, deemed given as proof that it was concluded and set off against the price: its function is evidential, and it forms part of the price rather than a separate sum. Cayma parası (Article 178) is different — if it is agreed, each party may withdraw, the payer forfeiting what was paid and the recipient returning double. Forfeiture is therefore the consequence of an agreement that has to be proved, not an automatic effect of paying money. That inverts what many international buyers expect: in several legal traditions paying “earnest money” is read from the outset as buying a right to change your mind.
Why is a reservation agreement usually void?
Because land is not sold, or promised, on a private document. Article 12 sets the rule: contracts require no particular form unless the law provides otherwise, but a form prescribed by law is as a rule a validity requirement, and contracts concluded without it produce no effect. Article 237 applies that to land, and Article 89 of Notaries Law No. 1512 lists the gayrimenkul satış vaadi among transactions that must be executed in düzenleme form. Since Law No. 7413 of 23 June 2022 amended Article 60/3, notaries may also annotate such a promise on the land registry through the land-registry IT system where a party asks and pays the fees, and may conclude immovable sale contracts. Annotation makes the right assertable against later acquirers (Article 1009 of Civil Code No. 4721), but it is a reinforced personal right, not a pledge, and gives no priority ranking if the seller fails.
The consequence is blunt: a reservation form signed in a sales office, a private paper drawn up by an agency, an email “locking in” a price — none creates an obligation to sell land, and none is a valid ground for keeping money.
Consumer law goes further. Article 41 of Consumer Protection Law No. 6502 requires a pre-paid housing sale to be registered at the land registry, or the promise to sell to be made before a notary in düzenleme form; it bars the seller from invoking that invalidity against the consumer, and provides that the seller may not ask the consumer for any payment under any name unless a valid contract has been made. Breach carries an administrative fine, revalued annually.
On what basis is the money recovered?
On unjust enrichment. Article 77 provides that a person enriched without a valid ground out of another’s assets or labour must return the enrichment, and that the duty arises in particular where the ground was invalid, never materialised, or later ceased. All three limbs fit deposit disputes: a form-defective reservation is an invalid ground; a sale never concluded is a ground that never materialised; a contract validly rescinded is a ground that ceased.
Article 79 sets the extent of restitution, generally in the claimant’s favour: the enriched party returns what is left, minus what it proves has gone, but must return the whole enrichment if it disposed of the money in bad faith or should have reckoned with having to return it. Article 78 cuts the other way — someone who voluntarily performed an obligation he did not owe may reclaim only if he proves he believed himself bound, which is the standard defence against a buyer who paid knowing no contract yet existed. Interest turns on Article 117: the debtor is in default from the date of the enrichment, except where the enriched party is in good faith, in which case notice is required — hence the notarial demand before suit. Limitation is in Article 82: two years from learning of the right to reclaim, ten years from the enrichment in any event.
Retention by the other side is possible but needs a ground. Where the contract was valid in form and the buyer breached, the deposit is not automatically forfeited: retention operates as set-off against proven damages or an agreed penalty. Where a cayma parası was genuinely agreed in a contract that is itself valid, Article 178 applies on its terms. And a penalty clause faces two limits — it cannot be enforced if the principal obligation is invalid for any reason (Article 182/2), and the court reduces an excessive penalty of its own motion (Article 182/3). Article 2 of the Civil Code sits over all of it: rights must be exercised in good faith, and manifest abuse of a right is not protected.
Where is the claim brought, and how is it secured?
Serve a notarial demand first; then the route depends on the counterparty. In a consumer relationship, Law No. 6502 applies: for 2026, disputes below TRY 186,000 go to the Consumer Arbitration Committee (mandatory), and disputes at or above it to the consumer court. Recourse to mediation must precede a consumer-court action: it is a condition of suit save for the exceptions the statute lists, among them matters that fall within the committee’s own jurisdiction. Most deposits sit below the threshold, and the figure is revalued each year — see our guide to suing a developer in the Turkish consumer courts. Where the seller is a private individual, the asliye hukuk mahkemesi has jurisdiction under Article 2 of Civil Procedure Law No. 6100 regardless of value.
If assets may disappear, a money claim is secured by provisional attachment (ihtiyati haciz) under Article 257 of Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004. Two conditions matter: the applicant is liable for all damage if shown to be wrong and must provide security fixed by the court, for which the statute sets no percentage (Article 259); and a creditor who attaches before suing must file the enforcement request or the lawsuit within seven days of execution, or the attachment lapses (Article 264). An interim injunction under Article 389/1 is a different instrument, aimed at the subject-matter of the dispute rather than at a money claim.
A criminal dimension may also exist where the payer was induced by deceit — property offered by someone who does not own it, forged documents, the same unit “reserved” to several buyers. Article 157 of Criminal Code No. 5237 punishes fraud with one to five years’ imprisonment and a judicial fine of up to 5,000 days, and Article 158 raises the range to three to ten years in the listed circumstances; neither requires a complaint, so both are investigated ex officio. Characterisation is for the prosecutor and the court, and a criminal file does not itself return the money — see our guide to real estate fraud in Türkiye.
Deposit disputes turn on two questions: whether the agreement met the official-form requirement, and whether the claim was brought in time. Where the deposit sits inside a stalled project the analysis overlaps with late delivery of an off-plan apartment, and the wider framework is in our guides to buying property in Türkiye as a foreigner and to protecting a property investment in Türkiye stage by stage. Having the paperwork reviewed before signing, through our real estate practice, costs far less than any recovery claim.
