International trade creates a recurring enforcement problem.

A Turkish company supplies goods, performs services, grants financing or fulfils another commercial obligation for a foreign company. The invoice becomes due. The foreign customer stops responding.

The debtor may be incorporated in Germany, the United Kingdom, the UAE, Russia, Azerbaijan, the United States or another jurisdiction.

Yet the debtor may still have valuable connections with Turkey:

• money in Turkish bank accounts;
• receivables from Turkish customers;
• a Turkish branch;
• shares in Turkish companies;
• machinery or inventory in Turkey;
• real estate;
• commercial relationships through which payments regularly pass through Turkey.

The creditor then asks:

“The debtor company is abroad. Can I collect the debt in Turkey?”

Potentially, yes.

But the correct strategy depends on the legal position at the time enforcement begins.

There are essentially four different situations:

1. No judgment exists yet, and the creditor wants to sue or commence enforcement in Turkey.
2. A foreign court has already issued a judgment.
3. An international arbitral tribunal has issued an award.
4. There is an urgent risk that the foreign debtor will remove its Turkish assets before a final decision is obtained.

The correct route must be identified before proceedings begin.

1. The First Question Is Not Where the Creditor Is — It Is Where the Debtor’s Assets Are

International debt collection should begin with an asset investigation.

A creditor may have an excellent contract and an indisputable invoice, but a judgment has limited commercial value if there is nothing against which it can be enforced.

Before choosing litigation, counsel should investigate whether the foreign company has assets in Turkey, including:

• Turkish bank accounts;
• receivables from Turkish customers;
• real estate;
• vehicles;
• machinery;
• stock or inventory;
• shares in Turkish companies;
• rights against Turkish third parties;
• a Turkish branch.

The central question is:

If we obtain an enforceable title tomorrow, what can actually be seized?

International debt recovery should therefore begin with enforcement strategy rather than end with it.

2. Can a Foreign Company Be Sued in Turkey?

The fact that the defendant is incorporated abroad does not automatically prevent Turkish courts from hearing the dispute.

Article 40 of the Turkish International Private and Procedural Law Act — Law No. 5718 (“MÖHUK”) — provides that the international jurisdiction of Turkish courts is determined by the domestic territorial-jurisdiction rules.

Accordingly, counsel must determine whether the dispute has a jurisdictional connection that would make a Turkish court territorially competent under Turkish procedural law.

For example, Article 10 of the Turkish Code of Civil Procedure (“HMK”) provides that contractual claims may also be brought before the court of the place where the contract is to be performed. HMK Article 9 also contains rules relating to defendants without a domicile in Turkey and certain property-related disputes.

This means that a foreign company cannot simply say:

“Our registered office is outside Turkey, therefore Turkish courts can never hear the case.”

The actual jurisdictional links must be analysed.

3. The Place of Performance Can Be Extremely Important

Imagine the following contract.

A Turkish manufacturer sells machinery to a foreign purchaser.

The contract requires the foreign purchaser to pay the purchase price into the Turkish seller’s bank account in Istanbul.

Payment is never made.

One of the questions counsel should examine is whether Turkey qualifies as the relevant place of performance for jurisdictional purposes.

HMK Article 10 expressly permits contractual actions to be brought in the place where the contract is to be performed.

However, international cases require careful analysis of:

• the precise payment clause;
• Incoterms;
• the contractual place of performance;
• the governing law;
• jurisdiction clauses;
• arbitration clauses.

The existence of a Turkish creditor alone should not be treated as sufficient jurisdictional analysis.

4. Check the Jurisdiction Clause Before Filing Anything

Many international commercial contracts contain clauses such as:

“The courts of London shall have exclusive jurisdiction.”

or:

“Any dispute shall be submitted to the courts of Dubai.”

or:

“The courts of Istanbul shall have exclusive jurisdiction.”

These clauses can fundamentally affect the collection strategy.

MÖHUK Article 47 permits parties, subject to its statutory conditions, to agree that disputes arising from an international debt relationship will be heard by a foreign court where Turkish territorial jurisdiction is not based on exclusive jurisdiction.

Where a valid foreign-jurisdiction agreement exists, a Turkish case may ordinarily proceed only under the conditions identified in Article 47, including where the foreign court declines jurisdiction or the defendant fails to raise the jurisdiction objection in Turkey.

Therefore, the first document a lawyer should read is not the unpaid invoice.

It is the dispute resolution clause in the underlying contract.

5. Governing Law and Jurisdiction Are Two Different Questions

Another common mistake is to confuse the law governing the contract with the court authorised to hear the dispute.

A contract may state:

“This Agreement shall be governed by English law.”

That does not automatically mean only English courts can hear the case.

Likewise:

“Istanbul courts shall have jurisdiction”

does not necessarily mean Turkish substantive law applies.

Under MÖHUK Article 24, contractual obligations are principally subject to the law expressly selected by the parties. If no valid choice has been made, the law most closely connected with the contract is determined according to the statutory connecting factors.

Accordingly, a Turkish court may in an appropriate case have jurisdiction while being required to apply foreign substantive law.

This can materially affect:

• interest;
• limitation periods;
• contractual damages;
• interpretation of warranties;
• validity of penalty clauses;
• defences to payment.

6. Can the Creditor Start Enforcement Proceedings Directly in Turkey?

Potentially, depending on the jurisdictional basis and the nature of the debt.

Article 50 of the Turkish Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (“İİK”) provides that territorial-jurisdiction rules applicable to civil proceedings apply by analogy to enforcement proceedings concerning monetary or security obligations. The enforcement office at the place where the underlying contract was concluded may also be competent under the statutory rule.

For an unsecured commercial debt, ordinary enforcement proceedings may therefore be considered where a competent Turkish enforcement office can be identified.

However, this route should not be used mechanically.

If the foreign debtor challenges:

• the debt;
• the jurisdiction of the enforcement office;
• the amount;
• the contract;
• the signature;

additional litigation may become necessary.

For a substantial international commercial claim, the creditor should therefore ask whether direct enforcement offers a genuine tactical advantage over immediately pursuing the underlying commercial claim.

7. The Most Valuable Turkish Asset May Be a Receivable from Someone Else

A foreign company may appear to own nothing physically in Turkey while actually having significant receivables from Turkish businesses.

For example:

A German supplier is owed EUR 2 million by several Turkish customers.

At the same time, it owes your client EUR 500,000.

From an enforcement perspective, the debtor’s receivable against those Turkish customers can be much more valuable than searching for machinery or real estate.

Once an enforceable basis exists and Turkish enforcement requirements are satisfied, receivables and other rights held by third parties may become subject to attachment.

This is why commercial intelligence is critical.

Ask:

• Who buys from the foreign company in Turkey?
• Which Turkish distributor owes it money?
• Does it receive regular royalty or licence payments?
• Does it receive rent?
• Does it have Turkish subsidiaries making payments to the foreign parent?

The strongest collection target may never appear on the foreign company’s balance sheet as a Turkish “asset” in the ordinary sense.

8. Precautionary Attachment Can Change the Entire Case

Sometimes waiting for a final judgment defeats the purpose of litigation.

Assume a foreign company has TRY 30 million in a Turkish bank account.

The creditor has a mature EUR 500,000 commercial debt.

The foreign company learns litigation is coming and is preparing to remove the money from Turkey.

İİK Article 257 allows a creditor of an unsecured and due monetary claim, subject to the statutory requirements, to request a precautionary attachment — ihtiyati haciz — over the debtor’s movable and immovable assets, receivables and other rights.

For certain unmatured claims, Article 257 also permits precautionary attachment where, for example, the debtor has no fixed residence or is hiding or transferring assets in order to escape its obligations.

In international recovery, this remedy can be decisive.

The creditor’s objective may be:

freeze first, litigate second.

Because a judgment against a foreign company with no assets remaining in Turkey may be commercially worthless.

9. The Creditor Must Make the Claim Convincing

Precautionary attachment is not granted merely because the creditor asserts that money is owed.

Under Article 258 İİK, the applicant must present evidence sufficient to persuade the court concerning the claim and, where relevant, the statutory grounds for attachment. The court may decide whether or not to hear the opposing party before ruling.

In an international trade case, relevant evidence may include:

• executed contract;
• purchase orders;
• invoices;
• bills of lading;
• customs records;
• delivery certificates;
• e-mails accepting the debt;
• account reconciliations;
• bank records;
• payment schedules;
• written acknowledgements.

A file consisting only of unilateral invoices is significantly weaker than a complete commercial evidence chain.

10. What If the Creditor Already Has a Foreign Court Judgment?

This produces a very different case.

Suppose the Turkish creditor sued the foreign debtor in Germany and obtained a final judgment ordering payment of EUR 750,000.

The debtor owns assets in Turkey.

The creditor normally cannot simply take the German judgment directly to a Turkish enforcement office and execute it as though it were a Turkish judgment.

MÖHUK Article 50 provides that foreign civil judgments that have become final under the law of the country in which they were rendered may be enforced in Turkey only after an authorised Turkish court issues a decision of enforcement — tenfiz.

Accordingly:

Foreign judgment → Turkish enforcement proceedings require tenfiz first.

11. What Does the Turkish Court Examine in a Tenfiz Case?

The Turkish court does not normally conduct a new trial of the underlying commercial dispute.

It does not simply reconsider whether the foreign judge calculated the invoice correctly.

Instead, MÖHUK establishes defined enforcement conditions.

Article 54 addresses matters including:

• reciprocity between Turkey and the foreign judgment state;
• absence of conflict with Turkish courts’ exclusive jurisdiction;
• certain jurisdictional objections relating to exorbitant foreign jurisdiction;
• absence of manifest conflict with Turkish public policy;
• proper respect for the defendant’s procedural participation and defence rights.

The Court of Cassation has emphasised that Turkish enforcement courts do not refuse a foreign judgment merely because the foreign court applied legal rules different from Turkish law. Public policy scrutiny focuses on whether enforcing the result would clearly violate fundamental Turkish legal principles.

This principle is extremely important.

Tenfiz is not an appeal from the foreign judgment.

12. The Judgment Must Be Final

One of the threshold requirements under MÖHUK Article 50 is that the foreign judgment must have become final under the law of the state where it was issued.

The enforcement petition must therefore be supported by appropriate documentation.

MÖHUK Article 53 requires, among other things:

• the duly certified original or certified copy of the foreign judgment;
• a duly certified translation;
• documentation demonstrating finality;
• a certified translation of that finality document.

In practice, apostille or other applicable authentication rules must also be examined according to the country concerned and any applicable international convention.

13. Where Is a Tenfiz Case Filed?

MÖHUK Article 51 provides the jurisdictional framework for enforcement applications.

The action may be brought at the place of residence or habitual presence in Turkey of the party against whom enforcement is requested.

Where that party has no residence or habitual presence in Turkey, the application can be brought before a competent court in Ankara, Istanbul or Izmir.

For a commercial judgment, the competent commercial first-instance court will generally be relevant according to the nature of the dispute.

Recent appellate practice continues to apply MÖHUK Articles 50 and following to foreign commercial judgments and examines finality, reciprocity, public policy and defence-right requirements.

14. A Tenfiz Case Is Not the Same as Suing for the Debt Again

This distinction can save enormous time.

If the creditor already has a final foreign judgment, it will often be unnecessary and strategically inefficient to start a completely new Turkish lawsuit arguing again that:

• the goods were delivered;
• the invoice was correct;
• the debtor breached the contract.

The Turkish proceeding may instead focus on whether the existing foreign judgment satisfies the enforcement requirements.

The creditor’s objective becomes:

convert the foreign judgment into an enforcement basis recognised in Turkey.

Once enforceability is granted, Turkish enforcement mechanisms can be used against assets located in Turkey.

15. Mandatory Commercial Mediation Requires Separate Attention

Where a creditor brings a new Turkish commercial action seeking payment of money, Turkish mandatory mediation rules must also be checked.

Under Article 5/A TCC, commercial lawsuits concerning monetary claims — and certain related proceedings included by subsequent amendments — are generally subject to mandatory mediation before the action is filed. The Ministry of Justice confirms that the mechanism applies to commercial monetary claims.

The fact that a dispute contains a foreign element does not by itself remove it from the Turkish mediation framework where a Turkish commercial action is otherwise being brought.

However, enforcement of a foreign judgment is structurally different. Recent appellate practice has held that an action seeking tenfiz of a foreign judgment is not subject to mandatory commercial mediation merely because the underlying foreign dispute concerned a commercial claim.

This distinction should be checked before proceedings begin.

16. What If the Contract Contains an Arbitration Clause?

Many international commercial contracts avoid national courts entirely.

For example:

“Any dispute shall be finally resolved by ICC arbitration seated in Paris.”

or:

“Disputes shall be resolved by LCIA arbitration in London.”

If a valid arbitration agreement applies, filing an ordinary Turkish merits action may not be the appropriate strategy.

The creditor may first need to obtain an arbitral award.

The next question becomes:

Can that foreign arbitral award be enforced against assets in Turkey?

Frequently, yes.

17. Turkey Is a Party to the New York Convention

Turkey is a contracting state to the 1958 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards — the New York Convention.

According to UNCITRAL’s official status table, the Convention entered into force for Turkey on 30 September 1992, subject to Turkey’s stated reciprocity and commercial reservations.

This makes international arbitration particularly important for cross-border collection.

A creditor may obtain an arbitral award outside Turkey and then seek recognition and enforcement against the debtor’s Turkish assets.

Where the New York Convention applies, it normally forms the primary international framework.

Where it does not apply, the foreign arbitral-award provisions of MÖHUK Articles 60–63 must also be considered.

18. Arbitration Can Be More Attractive Where Assets Exist in Several Countries

Suppose the debtor has:

• bank accounts in Turkey;
• real estate in Dubai;
• customers in Germany;
• a subsidiary in the Netherlands.

An international arbitral award may offer a more internationally portable enforcement instrument than a domestic court judgment, depending on the jurisdictions involved.

This is one reason dispute-resolution drafting at the contracting stage is not merely theoretical.

The question should not only be:

“Where would we prefer to litigate?”

It should be:

“If the counterparty refuses to pay, which dispute-resolution mechanism gives us the best chance of reaching its assets?”

19. Foreign Creditor Versus Foreign Debtor: Security for Costs May Arise

If the party commencing litigation or enforcement in Turkey is itself a foreign natural or legal person, MÖHUK Article 48 should also be considered.

The provision generally requires a foreign person initiating litigation, joining proceedings or commencing enforcement in Turkey to provide security covering procedural costs and potential losses, subject to exemption based on reciprocity.

Accordingly, a foreign creditor collecting against another foreign company through Turkey should check:

• whether security will be required;
• whether a bilateral treaty applies;
• whether reciprocity produces an exemption.

This issue will ordinarily not arise in the same form where the creditor itself is a Turkish company.

20. Foreign Service of Process Can Become the Slowest Part of the Case

A foreign debtor must receive legally valid service.

If proceedings are commenced in Turkey but the company has no authorised representative or address for service in Turkey, documents may need to be served abroad under the applicable:

• international convention;
• bilateral treaty;
• or Turkish international-service procedure.

Incorrect service can produce serious consequences.

It may delay the Turkish case.

More importantly, defective service in the original foreign proceedings may later become a defence when enforcement of the resulting foreign judgment is sought in Turkey.

MÖHUK Article 54 specifically protects against enforcement where the defendant was not properly called or represented under the circumstances described in the provision and raises the relevant objection.

Therefore, international service should be treated as a substantive litigation issue, not administrative paperwork.

21. Do Not Ignore Currency and Interest

International commercial claims are frequently denominated in:

• EUR;
• USD;
• GBP;
• CHF.

The contract should be reviewed carefully to determine:

• currency of payment;
• contractual interest;
• default interest;
• commencement date;
• whether payment may be made in another currency;
• applicable governing law.

The amount awarded by a foreign judgment or arbitral award may also include:

• principal;
• interest;
• litigation or arbitration costs;
• attorneys’ fees.

The Turkish enforcement strategy should identify precisely what portions of the foreign decision are being enforced.

22. Practical Example: Turkish Exporter v. German Buyer

Assume:

A Turkish manufacturer sells industrial equipment to a German company.

Purchase price: EUR 600,000.

The equipment is delivered.

The German company pays only EUR 100,000.

EUR 500,000 remains outstanding.

The creditor learns that the German company has approximately EUR 1 million receivable from a Turkish distributor.

Scenario A — Turkish courts have jurisdiction

If the contract and applicable jurisdiction rules establish Turkish international jurisdiction and no binding foreign forum or arbitration clause prevents proceedings, the creditor may consider Turkish litigation and, where the statutory conditions exist, precautionary attachment against assets or receivables in Turkey.

Scenario B — German courts are exclusively competent

If the contract validly selects German courts exclusively, the creditor may need to obtain the judgment in Germany.

Once the judgment is final, it can be brought to Turkey for tenfiz under MÖHUK Articles 50–57.

After tenfiz, the creditor can pursue the German company’s attachable Turkish assets.

Scenario C — ICC arbitration applies

The creditor should normally pursue the contractual arbitration route.

Once a foreign arbitral award is obtained, the creditor may seek enforcement in Turkey under the New York Convention or other applicable enforcement rules.

The commercial objective in all three scenarios is the same:

reach the Turkish receivable before the debtor collects and removes it.

23. Practical Example: Foreign Company Owns Real Estate in Turkey

Assume a Dubai company owes a Turkish contractor USD 2 million.

The Dubai company also owns commercial real estate in Istanbul.

The creditor should immediately examine:

• the dispute-resolution clause;
• governing law;
• whether a Turkish court has international jurisdiction over the underlying claim;
• whether a final foreign judgment already exists;
• whether precautionary protection can be obtained;
• whether there are mortgages or prior attachments over the property.

Simply knowing that real estate exists is not enough.

The asset’s net enforcement value matters.

A property worth USD 3 million subject to a USD 2.9 million senior mortgage may provide little practical security.

24. Practical Example: Foreign Company Has No Direct Assets but Has a Turkish Subsidiary

This scenario requires caution.

Foreign Parent Ltd. owes the creditor EUR 1 million.

Its Turkish subsidiary has TRY 100 million in its bank account.

Can the creditor simply seize the subsidiary’s money?

Generally, corporate separateness must be respected.

The Turkish subsidiary’s assets belong to the subsidiary, not automatically to the foreign parent merely because the parent owns the shares.

However, the foreign parent’s:

• shares in the Turkish subsidiary;
• receivables from the subsidiary;
• dividend rights;
• other attachable rights

may require separate investigation.

The correct target is the debtor’s asset.

Not an asset belonging to a different company merely because the debtor controls it.

25. What Documents Should Be Collected Before Recovery Begins?

A cross-border collection file should ideally contain:

Contractual documents

• master agreement;
• purchase orders;
• terms and conditions;
• amendments;
• jurisdiction clause;
• arbitration clause;
• governing-law provision.

Performance evidence

• invoices;
• delivery records;
• bills of lading;
• customs documents;
• signed acceptance forms;
• service completion reports.

Debt acknowledgement evidence

• account reconciliations;
• payment promises;
• e-mails;
• WhatsApp correspondence;
• partial payments;
• restructuring proposals.

Debtor information

• current corporate registration;
• directors;
• registered office;
• subsidiaries;
• branch records.

Turkish asset information

• known banks;
• customers;
• real estate;
• subsidiaries;
• receivables;
• other commercial relationships.

International collection becomes substantially easier when the creditor can establish both:

the debt and the enforcement target.

26. Do Not Start in the Wrong Country Simply Because It Is Convenient

A Turkish company may instinctively want to sue in Istanbul.

But that is not always the best commercial decision.

Suppose:

• the debtor is in England;
• all assets are in England;
• English courts have jurisdiction;
• the debtor has nothing in Turkey.

Obtaining a Turkish judgment may simply create another international-enforcement problem.

By contrast, if the debtor has significant assets in Turkey, Turkish proceedings or eventual Turkish enforcement can be extremely valuable.

International debt collection should therefore be built backwards:

Where are the assets?

Then:

What enforceable title will reach those assets most efficiently?

Only then:

Where should we litigate or arbitrate?

27. A Practical Recovery Strategy

When a commercial receivable is owed by a foreign company, the following sequence should generally be considered.

Step 1 — Verify the debtor

Confirm the company’s exact legal name, jurisdiction, registration number and current status.

Step 2 — Establish the debt

Identify the contract, invoices, performance documents and due date.

Step 3 — Review dispute resolution

Check jurisdiction and arbitration clauses immediately.

Step 4 — Determine governing law

Analyse MÖHUK Article 24 and any contractual choice of law.

Step 5 — Search for Turkish assets

Identify receivables, bank relationships, shares, branches and physical property.

Step 6 — Analyse Turkish jurisdiction

Apply MÖHUK Article 40 together with the relevant HMK territorial-jurisdiction provisions.

Step 7 — Consider precautionary attachment

If assets may disappear, examine İİK Articles 257 and following before waiting for a final judgment.

Step 8 — Choose the correct merits route

This may be:

• Turkish court litigation;
• foreign court litigation;
• international arbitration.

Step 9 — If a foreign judgment exists, seek tenfiz

Do not automatically re-litigate the entire debt.

Step 10 — If an arbitral award exists, pursue enforcement

Analyse the New York Convention first where applicable.

Step 11 — Move immediately to execution

Once an enforceable Turkish title exists, target identified assets without unnecessary delay.

28. The Three Most Common Mistakes

Mistake 1 — Winning the Case Before Searching for Assets

A creditor spends three years obtaining a judgment and only then discovers that the debtor has no attachable property.

Asset tracing should begin at the start.

Mistake 2 — Ignoring the Jurisdiction or Arbitration Clause

Proceedings are commenced in Turkey, only for the defendant to rely on a binding foreign-jurisdiction or arbitration clause.

Contract review should come before filing.

Mistake 3 — Waiting While Turkish Assets Disappear

The creditor learns that the debtor has Turkish receivables but waits for negotiations to conclude.

Two months later the receivables have been collected and transferred abroad.

Where the statutory requirements exist, precautionary protection should be analysed early.

29. Final Takeaway

A foreign company’s refusal to pay does not necessarily mean that the creditor must chase the debtor exclusively in the country where it is incorporated.

Turkey can become an important collection jurisdiction where:

• Turkish courts have international jurisdiction over the underlying dispute;
• the contractual place of performance creates a Turkish connection;
• the debtor has attachable rights or assets in Turkey;
• a foreign judgment can be recognised and enforced here;
• or a foreign arbitral award can be enforced against Turkish assets.

MÖHUK Article 40 links Turkish international jurisdiction to domestic territorial-jurisdiction rules, while Article 47 requires careful examination of contractual foreign-jurisdiction agreements. Contractual governing law is separately determined under Article 24.

Where there is an immediate risk to recovery, İİK Article 257 provides the powerful institution of precautionary attachment for qualifying monetary claims.

Where the creditor already holds a final foreign judgment, MÖHUK Articles 50–57 establish the Turkish tenfiz mechanism rather than requiring the underlying commercial dispute simply to be tried again.

Where an arbitral award exists, Turkey’s participation in the New York Convention provides an internationally recognised enforcement framework for qualifying foreign arbitral awards.

For that reason, when a client says:

“A foreign company owes us EUR 1 million and refuses to pay,”

the first question should not simply be:

“Which court should we sue in?”

A better investigation begins with:

Where is the debtor’s money?

Does it have receivables or assets in Turkey?

What does the contract say about courts and arbitration?

Can those Turkish assets be protected before they disappear?

And finally:

What is the fastest legally enforceable route from an unpaid invoice to an actual asset that can be seized?

Because in international debt collection, obtaining a judgment is only half the job.

The real victory is turning that judgment into money.