Securing a multi-million-dollar judgment or arbitral award abroad is only half the battle. When the defaulting party’s assets, subsidiaries, shipping fleets, or bank accounts are situated in Türkiye, the judgment must be converted into an enforceable Turkish judicial writ. Under Private International and Procedural Law No. 5718 (MÖHUK) and the 1958 New York Convention, foreign decisions require a specialized judicial decree of Exequatur (Tenfiz) before Turkish bailiffs and enforcement offices can execute seizures.
Lex Lata serves as lead Turkish enforcement counsel for international corporations, foreign law firms, arbitral award creditors, and global litigation funders. We guide international claimants through the strict procedural requirements of Turkish courts, pursuing asset preservation and realisation of cross-border claims.
1. Statutory Framework for Foreign Court Judgments (MÖHUK Articles 50–59)
Under MÖHUK Article 50, final civil and commercial judgments rendered by foreign courts can be enforced in Turkey provided they receive an exequatur order from the competent Turkish Commercial Court (Asliye Ticaret Mahkemesi).
The Four Statutory Exequatur Conditions (MÖHUK Article 54):
- Reciprocity (Karşılıklılık - Art. 54/1-a): There must be contractual, statutory, or de facto reciprocity between Türkiye and the rendering state. Reciprocity is established if Turkish judgments are enforceable in that jurisdiction.
- Absence of Exclusive Turkish Jurisdiction (Art. 54/1-b): The dispute must not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of Turkish courts (e.g., in rem rights over Turkish real estate or Turkish consumer tenancy).
- Compliance with Public Policy (Kamu Düzeni - Art. 54/1-c): The foreign judgment must not be manifestly contrary to Turkish public policy.
- Due Process & Right to be Heard (Art. 54/1-d): The defendant must have been duly summoned, properly served under international service conventions (such as the 1965 Hague Service Convention), and afforded full opportunity to defend themselves abroad.
Procedural Distinction: Foreign court judgments are governed by MÖHUK Articles 50–59 and require contractual, statutory, or de facto reciprocity. Foreign arbitral awards fall under the 1958 New York Convention and MÖHUK Articles 60–63, enjoying automatic convention-based enforceability across 170+ signatory jurisdictions.
2. Prohibition of Reviewing the Merits (Revision au Fond Yasağı)
One of the most critical protections for foreign creditors under Turkish law is the absolute Prohibition of Revision au Fond codified in MÖHUK Article 54.
- No Retrial of the Dispute: Turkish commercial judges are strictly prohibited from re-evaluating the factual findings, witness testimonies, expert opinions, or substantive law applied by the foreign court.
- Strictly Formal Review: The Turkish court’s role is confined exclusively to verifying whether the four formal conditions of Article 54 are satisfied. Even if the foreign judge misapplied the governing contract law or reached a harsh conclusion, the Turkish court cannot alter or dismiss the judgment on substantive grounds.
3. Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards (1958 New York Convention)
Türkiye has been a contracting state to the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 1958) since 1992. In addition, MÖHUK Articles 60 to 63 provide a complementary domestic statutory framework for foreign arbitral awards (ICC, LCIA, ISTAC, DIS, Swiss Rules, GAFTA, FOSFA).
Grounds for Refusal under Article V of the New York Convention:
A Turkish court may refuse enforcement of an arbitral award only upon proof of the narrow grounds exhaustively listed in Article V:
- Incapacity or Invalidity of Arbitration Agreement: The parties lacked legal capacity, or the arbitration agreement is invalid under the applicable law.
- Defective Notice & Right to Defense: The party against whom the award is invoked was not given proper notice of the appointment of the arbitrator or the arbitration proceedings.
- Excess of Mandate (Ultra Petita): The award deals with a difference not contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration.
- Irregular Arbitral Tribunal Composition: The composition of the arbitral authority or the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties.
- Non-Final or Set-Aside Award: The award has not yet become binding on the parties or has been set aside by a competent authority of the country in which it was made.
- Non-Arbitrability & Turkish Public Policy: The subject matter is not capable of settlement by arbitration under Turkish law, or enforcement is contrary to Turkish public policy.
| Dimension | Foreign Court Judgment (Tenfiz) | Foreign Arbitral Award (New York Conv.) |
|---|---|---|
| Governing Law | MÖHUK Articles 50–59 | 1958 New York Convention & MÖHUK 60–63 |
| Reciprocity Requirement | Mandatory (Contractual, Statutory, or De Facto) | Automatic across 170+ New York Convention states |
| Grounds for Refusal | Limited to MÖHUK Article 54 | Exhaustive list under New York Conv. Article V |
| Substantive Review | Strictly Prohibited (Revision au Fond) | Strictly Prohibited |
| Execution Track | Execution with Judgment (İlamlı İcra) | Execution with Judgment (İlamlı İcra) |
4. Navigating the Turkish Public Policy Exception (Kamu Düzeni)
Debtors facing exequatur proceedings in Turkey frequently assert a generic defence that the foreign judgment or arbitral award violates Turkish Public Policy (Kamu Düzeni İstisnası).
High court jurisprudence establishes strict boundaries for this exception:
- Restrictive Interpretation: The Court of Cassation consistently rules that public policy must be interpreted restrictively (dar yorumlanması gerekir). An outcome is contrary to public policy only if it breaches fundamental principles of the Turkish constitutional order, basic human rights, or core procedural rules of justice.
- Default Interest & Liquidated Damages: Foreign contractual default interest rates or standard liquidated damages clauses do not violate Turkish public policy unless they are manifestly extortionate.
- Default Judgments: A foreign default judgment (gıyap kararı) is fully enforceable in Turkey, provided the defendant was served in accordance with international service conventions and granted sufficient time to respond.
5. Security for Court Costs (Cautio Judicatum Solvi) & Treaty Exemptions
Under MÖHUK Article 48, foreign legal entities initiating litigation in Turkey are generally required to provide a security deposit of 10% to 15% of the dispute value to guarantee court costs and opposing counsel fees.
Complete Exemption from Security:
Claimants from countries that have ratified multilateral or bilateral procedural conventions with Türkiye are completely exempt from providing security:
- 1954 Hague Convention on Civil Procedure: Entities from signatory states (including Germany, France, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, Norway, Russia, Japan) are exempt from security under Article 17.
- Bilateral Judicial Assistance Treaties: Türkiye has bilateral treaties waiving security requirements with the United Kingdom, Northern Cyprus, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Jordan, Kuwait, and others.
6. Precautionary Attachment Pending Tenfiz & Final Execution
A major tactical risk in exequatur litigation is that the debtor, aware of the pending tenfiz lawsuit, may liquidate their Turkish assets during the 6 to 12 months required to obtain a final decree.
To eliminate this risk, Lex Lata applies a two-stage execution strategy:
- Emergency Precautionary Freeze (Day 1): Simultaneously with or prior to filing the tenfiz lawsuit, we petition the court for an Emergency Precautionary Attachment (İhtiyati Haciz under İİK Art. 257) based on the foreign judgment. This immediately locks down the debtor’s bank accounts, company shares, and real estate.
- Compulsory Judgment Execution (İlamlı İcra): Once the tenfiz decision becomes enforceable, the foreign judgment carries the identical legal force of a domestic Turkish court decree. We immediately transition the file to the Enforcement Office under İİK Article 26 et seq., enabling direct bank fund transfers and public auctions of seized assets.
Related Practice Areas & Strategic Legal Guides
- Commercial Debt Collection & Asset Recovery: Cross-border B2B debt enforcement and precautionary asset freezes (İİK 257).
- Foreign Judgment & Arbitral Award Enforcement (Tenfiz): Exequatur proceedings under MÖHUK No. 5718 and the 1958 New York Convention.
- Commercial Fraud & White-Collar Crime: Emergency CMK 128 asset freezing, director embezzlement, and MASAK investigations.
- English-Speaking Lawyers in Istanbul: Strategic litigation and court representation across Çağlayan, Kartal, and Bakırköy courthouses.
Roadmap for Enforcing Foreign Judgments & Arbitral Awards in Turkey
- 01
1. Document Audit & Apostille Verification
We verify the foreign court judgment or arbitral award, secure the certificate of finality, and oversee sworn notarized translations under MÖHUK Article 53.
- 02
2. Precautionary Asset Freezing (İhtiyati Haciz)
To prevent asset stripping during litigation, we petition the Commercial Court for ex-parte precautionary attachments across Turkish bank accounts and Land Registries.
- 03
3. Filing the Tenfiz Lawsuit (Asliye Ticaret Mahkemesi)
We file the formal exequatur claim before the specialized Commercial Court, establishing reciprocity, due process compliance, and alignment with Turkish public policy.
- 04
4. Overcoming Procedural & Public Policy Objections
We neutralize debtor delaying tactics regarding service of process abroad, contractual choice of forum, or bad-faith public policy claims.
- 05
5. Execution & Compulsory Recovery (İlamlı İcra)
Upon the granting of tenfiz, the judgment is transferred to the Enforcement Office for compulsory execution, asset auction, and foreign currency fund remittance.
Frequently asked questions
Can a Turkish court re-examine the facts or merits of our foreign judgment?
No. Under Article 54 of Private International and Procedural Law No. 5718 (MÖHUK), Turkish courts are subject to a strict Prohibition of Revision au Fond (yasağı inceleme). The court cannot examine whether the foreign judge applied the correct law or evaluated evidence properly. The review is strictly confined to formal exequatur conditions (finality, reciprocity, public policy, and due process).
How long does a foreign judgment enforcement (tenfiz) lawsuit take in Turkey?
An uncontested or well-documented exequatur proceeding before the Istanbul Commercial Courts typically resolves in 6 to 12 months. Where appeals (Regional Court of Appeal and Court of Cassation) are filed, the process can take 14 to 20 months. However, debtor assets can be frozen immediately on Day 1 via precautionary attachment to prevent dissipation during proceedings.
What is the reciprocity requirement (karşılıklılık) for foreign court judgments?
Under MÖHUK Article 54/1(a), foreign court judgments require reciprocity between Turkey and the state of origin. Reciprocity exists through (1) bilateral treaties, (2) statutory reciprocity where the foreign country's laws allow Turkish judgments to be enforced, or (3) de facto reciprocity confirmed by foreign court precedent. Notable countries with established reciprocity include the UK, USA, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Netherlands, France, UAE, Italy, Russia, and Saudi Arabia.
Does reciprocity apply to international arbitral awards under the New York Convention?
For arbitral awards rendered in states party to the 1958 New York Convention (currently over 170 jurisdictions), reciprocity is governed by the Convention itself. Turkish courts enforce foreign arbitral awards seamlessly under MÖHUK Articles 60 to 63 without requiring a bilateral judicial treaty.
What documents are required to initiate a tenfiz lawsuit in Turkey?
You must provide (1) the original or apostilled certified copy of the foreign court judgment or arbitral award, (2) an official certificate of finality (kesinleşme şerhi) proving the judgment is no longer subject to ordinary appeal, (3) sworn Turkish translations certified by a Turkish notary or consulate, and (4) an apostilled Power of Attorney.
What constitutes a 'Public Policy' (kamu düzeni) violation under Turkish law?
Public policy exception under MÖHUK Article 54/1(c) is interpreted narrowly by high courts. It applies only where enforcing the foreign judgment would shatter the fundamental constitutional, moral, or procedural values of the Turkish legal system (such as total denial of right to be heard, punitive damages exceeding actual loss, or severe violations of due process). Ordinary differences between Turkish and foreign substantive law do not constitute a public policy violation.
Are foreign plaintiffs required to deposit security for court costs (cautio judicatum solvi)?
Under Article 48 of MÖHUK, foreign legal entities filing lawsuits in Turkey must deposit a security (teminat) of 10% to 15% of the claim value. However, plaintiffs from countries party to the 1954 Hague Convention on Civil Procedure (including Germany, France, Italy, Switzerland, Netherlands, Russia, Austria) or bilateral reciprocal agreements are completely exempt from this requirement.
Can we freeze the debtor's assets before the tenfiz judgment becomes final?
Yes. Turkish procedural jurisprudence allows creditors to obtain an Emergency Precautionary Attachment (ihtiyati haciz under İİK Art. 257) based on a foreign judgment or arbitral award. This blocks the debtor's bank accounts, corporate shareholdings, and real estate while the exequatur proceedings are underway.