Enforcing international arbitral awards and foreign judgments in Türkiye.

The Legal Framework: The 1958 New York Convention & MÖHUK

Türkiye has been a contracting state to the 1958 United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention) since 1992. For foreign state court decisions, enforcement (tenfiz) is governed by the Turkish Act on Private International Law and International Civil Procedure (Law No. 5718, MÖHUK, Articles 50–63).

Under both regimes, foreign arbitral awards and court judgments carry strong legal presumption of enforceability, provided basic procedural and due process standards were respected in the seat of arbitration or foreign court.

The Prohibition of "Révision au Fond" (No Re-Litigation)

A fundamental principle of Turkish enforcement law (MÖHUK Art. 54) is the strict prohibition of révision au fond (review on the merits). The Turkish commercial court cannot re-examine the substantive facts, re-weigh evidence, or question whether the arbitrator or foreign judge decided correctly on the contract.

The Turkish judge’s review is strictly limited to formal, procedural criteria:

• Due Process (Right to Be Heard): The Turkish debtor was duly summoned, received proper notice of the proceedings, and was given adequate opportunity to present their defense.
• Finality and Binding Nature: The award or court decision is final (kesinleşmiş) and no longer subject to ordinary suspensive appeals in the country of origin.
• Public Policy (Kamu Düzeni): The enforcement must not breach fundamental Turkish public policy (e.g. awards obtained by proven fraud or violating fundamental constitutional norms).

Court Procedure and Venue in Türkiye

Tenfiz proceedings are initiated by filing an enforcement petition before the Commercial Court of First Instance (Asliye Ticaret Mahkemesi) at the debtor's registered corporate seat in Türkiye (e.g. Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, Bursa, Antalya). If the debtor has no domicile in Türkiye, the action can be filed where the debtor's attachable real estate or assets are located.

Court Fee Regime: Fixed Fee (Maktu Harç) Victory

One of the greatest tactical advantages for foreign creditors enforcing judgments in Türkiye is the court fee regime. Following landmark decisions by the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay), tenfiz lawsuits are subject to a fixed court filing fee (maktu harç) rather than the proportional percentage fee (nispi harç of 6.83%) that applies to ordinary domestic lawsuits.

This means whether your arbitral award is for $500,000 or $50,000,000, the initial court filing duty is negligible.

Security Deposit Exemptions (MÖHUK Art. 48)

While MÖHUK Article 48 technically requires foreign plaintiffs to deposit a security guarantee (typically 10% to 15%), foreign claimants from over 50 jurisdictions are completely exempt by virtue of:

• The 1954 Hague Convention on Civil Procedure (Germany, Austria, France, Italy, Switzerland, Netherlands, etc.).
• Bilateral judicial assistance treaties (e.g. UK, Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Georgia, Azerbaijan, China).
• Arbitral awards enforced under the New York Convention.

Freezing Debtor Assets While Tenfiz is Pending

A critical fear of foreign judgment holders is that the Turkish debtor will liquidate their assets while the tenfiz lawsuit is underway. Under settled Turkish high court precedent, creditors can apply for an urgent Precautionary Attachment (İhtiyati Haciz) simultaneously with or even prior to filing the tenfiz petition, effectively locking debtor bank accounts and real estate until final execution.

Frequently Asked Questions