How Are Foreign Court Judgments Recognised and Enforced in Türkiye?
Işık Hukuk Bürosu
3 hours ago
5 min read
Introduction
As a rule, for a court judgment rendered in another country to have legal effect or be enforceable in Türkiye, the recognition or enforcement (exequatur) procedure provided under Turkish law must be completed.
The recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgments is governed mainly by Articles 50 to 59 of the Law No. 5718 on International Private and Procedural Law ("IPPL"). Where Türkiye is a party to a relevant international convention, the provisions of that convention are also taken into account.
Recognition and enforcement are not the same legal institution. The applicable mechanism depends on whether the foreign judgment is intended only to have res judicata or conclusive evidentiary effect in Türkiye, or whether it is also sought to be enforced.
The Difference Between Recognition and Enforcement
Recognition
Recognition (tanıma) ensures that a foreign court judgment is accepted in Türkiye as having res judicata effect or as conclusive evidence.
Under Article 58 of the IPPL, a foreign judgment may be accepted as conclusive evidence or as res judicata only if the court determines that it meets the conditions set out in the law.
Unlike enforcement, recognition does not require reciprocity under Article 54(1)(a) of the IPPL.
Enforcement
Enforcement (tenfiz), by contrast, makes a foreign court judgment enforceable in Türkiye.
Foreign judgments for which enforcement has been granted are enforced in the same manner as judgments rendered by Turkish courts.
Accordingly, recognition is relevant where the foreign judgment only needs to be accepted as establishing a legal status or as having res judicata effect. Enforcement becomes relevant where the aim is to collect a monetary claim or damages, or to have another enforceable obligation performed in Türkiye.
Is a Recognition Action Required for Every Foreign Judgment?
The same procedure does not apply in every case.
In particular, there is a special administrative procedure for registering in the Turkish civil registry foreign judgments on divorce, annulment of marriage, or a declaration as to whether a marriage exists.
For foreign family law judgments, it should therefore be assessed separately, with reference to the relevant special rules, whether it is actually necessary to file a recognition action before the courts in the specific case.
Competent Court and Jurisdiction
Under Article 51 of the IPPL, the court of first instance (asliye mahkemesi) has subject-matter jurisdiction over enforcement requests.
Territorial jurisdiction lies with the court of the place in Türkiye where the person against whom enforcement is sought is domiciled.
If that person has no domicile in Türkiye, the court of their place of residence has jurisdiction. If they have neither a domicile nor a residence in Türkiye, any of the courts in Ankara, Istanbul or İzmir has jurisdiction.
Depending on the nature of the dispute, however, special rules on subject-matter jurisdiction, such as those allocating cases to the civil courts of first instance or to the family courts, must also be considered.
Basic Conditions for Enforcement
Article 54 of the IPPL sets out the basic conditions for enforcing foreign court judgments.
1. Reciprocity
There must be reciprocity on the enforcement of court judgments between Türkiye and the state in which the judgment was rendered.
Reciprocity may be based on:
an international agreement,
statutory provisions in the law of the foreign state, or
de facto practice.
Reciprocity is required for enforcement but not for recognition.
2. Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Turkish Courts
The foreign judgment must not have been rendered on a matter falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Turkish courts.
It is therefore important in enforcement proceedings to examine whether any rule grants exclusive jurisdiction to the Turkish courts over the subject matter of the dispute.
In addition, provided that the defendant objects, a judgment rendered by the courts of a state that assumed jurisdiction despite having no genuine connection with the subject matter or the parties may also constitute a bar to enforcement.
3. No Manifest Violation of Turkish Public Policy
The foreign judgment must not be manifestly contrary to Turkish public policy.
The public policy review does not involve re-examining the merits of the foreign judgment.
The mere fact that the solution adopted under foreign law differs from the solution under Turkish law does not in itself constitute a violation of public policy. What matters is whether the legal consequences the foreign judgment would produce in Türkiye are acceptable from the standpoint of Turkish public policy.
4. Observance of the Right of Defence
The right of defence of the person against whom enforcement is sought must have been protected in the foreign proceedings.
Enforcement may be refused if that person was not duly summoned before the court that rendered the judgment in accordance with the laws of that place, was not represented, or was the subject of a default judgment rendered contrary to the relevant procedure, and objects before the Turkish court on that ground.
Does the Turkish Court Re-examine the Merits of the Foreign Judgment?
As a rule, no.
The court hearing a recognition or enforcement request is not an appellate body reassessing whether the foreign court decided the merits of the dispute correctly.
Its review is essentially limited to the recognition and enforcement conditions set out in the IPPL and in any applicable international conventions.
In legal doctrine, this approach is referred to as the prohibition of révision au fond.
Application and Required Documents
An enforcement request is made by petition.
The application should generally include:
the original or a duly certified copy of the foreign court judgment,
a duly issued document showing that the judgment has become final, and
certified Turkish translations of the required documents.
Depending on the country where the document was issued and the international agreements to which Türkiye is a party, an apostille or another certification procedure may also be required.
The documents to be submitted in a specific case should be assessed separately according to the country where the judgment was rendered and any applicable international conventions.
When the Foreign Judgment Takes Effect in Türkiye
Under Article 59 of the IPPL, the res judicata or conclusive evidentiary effect of a foreign judgment applies from the moment the foreign judgment became final.
A foreign judgment for which enforcement has been granted is enforced in the same manner as a judgment of a Turkish court.
Conclusion
Distinguishing correctly between recognition and enforcement is important for a foreign court judgment to have effect in Türkiye.
For enforcement, the conditions set out in the IPPL, in particular reciprocity, the exclusive jurisdiction of the Turkish courts, public policy and the right of defence, must be examined in light of the specific case.
It should also be investigated separately whether any international convention applies between Türkiye and the country where the judgment was rendered.
Particularly for family law judgments, the possible existence of special administrative recognition and registration mechanisms should be borne in mind, and the method to be applied should be determined according to the nature of the foreign judgment.
Legal Basis and Sources
Law No. 5718 on International Private and Procedural Law, Articles 50–59
Relevant bilateral and multilateral judicial cooperation conventions to which Türkiye is a party
Ministry of Justice, legislation on international judicial cooperation in civil matters
Relevant decisions of the Court of Cassation
Comments