Asset freezing in Turkish civil and commercial proceedings operates through two legally distinct instruments that are frequently confused but have fundamentally different application conditions, enforcement mechanisms, and challenge procedures. The first is provisional attachment (ihtiyati haciz) — a creditor's remedy under the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (İcra ve İflas Kanunu, İİK, Law No. 2004) Articles 257-268 that secures the enforcement of a future monetary judgment by preventing the debtor from disposing of assets before the creditor has obtained a final and executable judgment. The second is provisional injunctive relief (ihtiyati tedbir) — a broader interim remedy under the Civil Procedure Law (Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu, HMK, Law No. 6100) Articles 389-399 that prevents a specific harm or rights violation while the main proceedings are pending, applicable to both monetary and non-monetary claims. Applying the wrong instrument to a specific dispute — for example, seeking an ihtiyati tedbir for a pure monetary debt collection dispute that should have been addressed through ihtiyati haciz — creates procedural complications that delay effective asset protection. This guide explains both instruments, their application conditions, the bond requirements for each, the challenge procedures available to affected parties, and the enforcement and release mechanisms under current Turkish procedure. Practice may vary by authority and year — verify current İİK and HMK procedural requirements directly before filing any provisional measures application.
İhtiyati haciz — provisional attachment for monetary claims under İİK
A lawyer in Turkey advising on provisional attachment must explain that ihtiyati haciz under İİK Article 257 is specifically designed for creditors with liquid or near-liquid monetary claims — claims that are for a specific sum of money (not for the delivery of a specific item or the performance of a specific act) — and it gives the creditor the right to attach specific assets of the debtor as security for the potential future judgment before the main lawsuit is filed or concluded. İİK Article 257 provides that a creditor can apply for provisional attachment where: the claim is for a liquid amount or is likely to become liquid (the claim must be at least prima facie established); and one of the following risk conditions exists — the debtor has no fixed domicile (muayyen ikametgahı yoksa), the debtor is preparing to flee from their obligations (taahhütlerinden kaçmaya hazırlanıyorsa), the debtor is hiding or preparing to hide or transfer assets (mallarını kaçırmak veya kendisi kaçmak üzere hareket ediyorsa), or a new debt instrument without a maturity date is involved. The requirement that both a liquid claim and a risk condition exist means that an ihtiyati haciz application must specifically establish both elements with documentary evidence — courts do not grant provisional attachment on either element alone. Practice may vary by authority and year — verify current Turkish commercial court ihtiyati haciz admissibility standards and the specific risk condition evidence requirements applicable to the debtor's circumstances before any provisional attachment application.
An Istanbul Law Firm advising on the ihtiyati haciz application procedure must explain that provisional attachment applications are filed with the competent court — typically the commercial court (asliye ticaret mahkemesi) for commercial disputes or the civil court of first instance (asliye hukuk mahkemesi) for non-commercial disputes — and the court can grant the attachment without summoning the debtor (ex parte) where the urgency of the situation justifies it. The ex parte application is the more common route in practice because notice to the debtor before the attachment is granted would allow asset dissipation during the time required for the debtor to be summoned and heard. When the court grants the provisional attachment, it simultaneously requires the creditor to post a security bond (teminat) — typically set at approximately 15% of the claimed amount under İİK Article 266, though the court has discretion to set a higher percentage where the risk assessment justifies it. After the court grants the provisional attachment, the creditor must implement the attachment through the enforcement office (icra müdürlüğü) within the time specified in the court's decision, and must file the main lawsuit within 10 days of the attachment if the main lawsuit had not already been filed (İİK Article 264). Practice may vary — verify current ihtiyati haciz bond percentage standards at the relevant court and the specific 10-day main lawsuit filing deadline requirements before any provisional attachment application.
A law firm in Istanbul advising on the enforcement and scope of ihtiyati haciz must explain that provisional attachment under İİK creates an attachment annotation on the specific assets identified in the court's order — most commonly bank accounts, real estate (registered at the land registry), vehicles (registered with the traffic directorate), and company shares (registered in the company's share ledger or MKDS for publicly listed companies). The attachment annotation prevents the debtor from freely transferring, encumbering, or disposing of the attached assets during the period the attachment is in force. For bank accounts, the attachment instruction is sent directly to the bank by the enforcement office, directing the bank to block withdrawal from the account up to the attached amount while allowing deposits to continue. For real estate, the land registry (tapu sicili) annotates the title record with the attachment notice, preventing any transfer or encumbrance registration while the attachment is in effect. The provisional attachment remains in force until: the main lawsuit results in a judgment that can be enforced; the debtor substitutes the attachment with an acceptable security (teminat); or the attachment is lifted through the itiraz (objection) or appeal procedure. Practice may vary — verify current enforcement office ihtiyati haciz implementation procedures and the specific bank and land registry attachment notification requirements at the relevant institutions before any ihtiyati haciz enforcement action. The debt collection and enforcement framework is analyzed in the resource on debt collection in Turkey: legal process and enforcement options.
İhtiyati tedbir — provisional injunctive relief under HMK
An English speaking lawyer in Turkey advising on provisional injunctive relief must explain that ihtiyati tedbir under HMK Article 389 is a broader instrument than ihtiyati haciz — it is available for both monetary and non-monetary claims, and it can be used to prevent a wide range of harmful acts or situations pending the resolution of the main proceedings. HMK Article 389 allows a party to apply for provisional injunctive relief where: obtaining the right or claim would become significantly more difficult or impossible; or a delay would cause harm or serious damages. Unlike ihtiyati haciz, which requires a liquid monetary claim and a specific risk condition, ihtiyati tedbir requires a showing that without the interim measure, the main proceedings would be rendered meaningless or the claimant's rights would be irreparably prejudiced. Ihtiyati tedbir is the appropriate instrument for disputes involving: intellectual property infringement (preventing continued infringing use pending infringement litigation); construction or real estate disputes (stopping unauthorized construction or use pending title litigation); corporate disputes (preventing share transfers pending shareholder litigation); defamation or personality rights (preventing continued publication pending media litigation); and contract-specific performance obligations (preventing a party from breaching a specific contractual prohibition). Practice may vary by authority and year — verify current HMK Article 389 ihtiyati tedbir admissibility standards and the specific irreparable harm or rights impairment criteria applied at the relevant court before any provisional injunction application.
A Turkish Law Firm advising on the content of an ihtiyati tedbir order must explain that unlike ihtiyati haciz (which attaches specific assets for their monetary value), an ihtiyati tedbir can take many different forms depending on the nature of the threatened harm — and the applicant typically proposes the specific form of relief they seek, subject to the court's assessment of what is proportionate and necessary. Common forms of ihtiyati tedbir in Turkish commercial and civil practice include: an order prohibiting the transfer or encumbrance of specific real estate or corporate shares pending title or ownership dispute proceedings; an order requiring the removal of specific content from digital platforms or media pending defamation proceedings; an order requiring sequestration (yediemin — appointment of a custodian) of disputed assets that neither party can use pending a court determination of ownership; an order prohibiting a party from competing in a specific market or territory pending enforcement of a non-compete clause; and an order prohibiting the payment of certain funds from an escrow account pending determination of which party is entitled to them. The court can modify the requested form of ihtiyati tedbir based on proportionality — the relief granted must be no more restrictive than necessary to prevent the identified harm. Practice may vary — verify current Turkish court ihtiyati tedbir relief scope practice and the specific proportionality standards applied for different categories of claims before proposing any specific ihtiyati tedbir relief form.
A lawyer in Turkey advising on the bond requirement for ihtiyati tedbir must explain that HMK Article 392 requires the applicant for ihtiyati tedbir to post a bond (teminat) as a condition of the court granting the relief — the bond secures the respondent's potential compensation claim for the harm caused by the provisional measure if the applicant ultimately loses the main case. Unlike the approximate 15% standard for ihtiyati haciz bonds, ihtiyati tedbir bond amounts are determined by the court based on the specific circumstances — the value of the affected right, the magnitude of the potential harm caused by the relief, and the strength of the applicant's prima facie case. In practice, ihtiyati tedbir bonds in commercial cases can be set anywhere from a nominal amount (for cases where the prima facie case is very strong and the risk to the respondent is limited) to a significant proportion of the disputed value (for cases where the balance of hardship assessment weighs heavily against the respondent). The bond can typically be posted as a cash deposit to the court's deposit account or as a bank letter of guarantee (banka teminat mektubu) from a licensed Turkish bank. HMK Article 393(2) provides that in very urgent situations the court can grant the ihtiyati tedbir without requiring a bond upfront, ordering the bond to be posted after the relief is granted — but this is an exception rather than the standard. Practice may vary — verify current Turkish court ihtiyati tedbir bond calculation methodology and the specific bond forms accepted at the relevant court before any ihtiyati tedbir application. The commercial litigation framework is analyzed in the resource on commercial litigation in Turkey: dispute resolution strategy.
Application procedure — ex parte vs inter partes, and urgency requirements
An Istanbul Law Firm advising on the ex parte application option must explain that both ihtiyati haciz and ihtiyati tedbir applications can be filed ex parte (without prior notice to the other party) where the urgency of the situation justifies it — and in practice, the ex parte route is the standard approach for both instruments because notice to the debtor or respondent before the relief is granted would frequently enable them to dissipate assets or take harmful action during the notice period. The ex parte application must demonstrate urgency clearly — explaining why prior notice to the other party would defeat the purpose of the relief. For ihtiyati haciz, the İİK's risk conditions (flight risk, asset hiding) inherently justify the ex parte approach in most cases. For ihtiyati tedbir, the urgency must be specifically demonstrated — a provisional injunction to stop an ongoing IP infringement is inherently urgent; a provisional injunction to prevent a future breach of a contractual restriction may require more specific urgency justification. Courts that grant ex parte provisional measures typically set a short period within which the other party can apply for a hearing to challenge the relief. Practice may vary by authority and year — verify current commercial court ex parte application standards and the specific urgency evidence requirements for both ihtiyati haciz and ihtiyati tedbir before choosing between ex parte and inter partes application procedures.
A law firm in Istanbul advising on the content of a provisional measures application must explain that the application must present the court with two categories of evidence simultaneously: evidence establishing the prima facie case (that the applicant has a right or claim that is plausible on the available evidence — not proven to the final judgment standard but established well enough to justify interim protection); and evidence establishing the specific risk or harm that justifies the relief (that without the provisional measure, the right would be violated, the asset would be dissipated, or the harm would occur). The prima facie case evidence must include the underlying legal documents establishing the claim — the contract, invoice, promissory note, or other instrument giving rise to the monetary claim for ihtiyati haciz; or the title document, intellectual property registration, non-compete clause, or other right-establishing document for ihtiyati tedbir. The risk evidence must be specific and current — a general assertion that the debtor might hide assets is insufficient; specific evidence of recent asset transfers, planned relocation, or deteriorating financial position is required. Practice may vary — verify current court prima facie and risk evidence standards for provisional measures applications and the specific document format required at the relevant court before any application filing.
An English speaking lawyer in Turkey advising on the main case filing obligation must explain that Turkish procedural law imposes a specific obligation on applicants who obtain provisional measures: the applicant must file the main lawsuit (ana dava) within a defined period after the provisional measure is granted, or the provisional measure will be automatically lifted. For ihtiyati haciz, İİK Article 264 requires that the main enforcement proceedings (icra takibi) or the main lawsuit (dava) must be initiated within 10 days of the attachment if the main proceedings had not already been filed. For ihtiyati tedbir, HMK Article 397 requires that the main lawsuit must be filed within 2 weeks (ikinci hafta içinde) of the provisional measure's implementation if the provisional measure was obtained before the main lawsuit was filed. Missing these deadlines causes the provisional measure to lapse — the attachment or injunction is automatically lifted, and the applicant may be liable to the respondent for the harm caused by the measure during the period it was in effect. We calendar these filing deadlines simultaneously with the provisional measures application in every mandate — because the consequences of missing the main case filing deadline are irreversible. Practice may vary — verify current İİK Article 264 and HMK Article 397 main case filing deadlines and the specific triggering events that start each deadline before any provisional measures application. The commercial contract dispute resolution framework is analyzed in the resource on contract law in Turkey for foreign companies.
Challenging provisional measures — the itiraz procedure
A Turkish Law Firm advising on challenging ihtiyati haciz orders must explain that a debtor who is subject to a provisional attachment (ihtiyati haciz) can challenge the order through a formal objection (itiraz) under İİK Article 265. The itiraz must be filed within 7 days of the debtor's notification of the attachment order (or within 7 days of the attachment's implementation if the debtor was not previously notified). The itiraz is filed with the court that granted the attachment, and the debtor can raise any ground that shows the attachment was not legally justified — including: the creditor has no prima facie claim against the debtor; the specific risk condition required by İİK Article 257 was not met; the attached assets do not belong to the debtor; or the attachment is disproportionate to the claimed amount. The court typically holds a hearing on the itiraz within a short period and can lift the attachment, reduce its scope, require the creditor to post a higher bond, or maintain the attachment as granted. If the itiraz is denied, the debtor can appeal the itiraz decision to the Regional Court of Appeals (Bölge Adliye Mahkemesi). Practice may vary by authority and year — verify current İİK Article 265 itiraz procedure requirements and the specific grounds that courts currently accept for ihtiyati haciz objections before structuring any provisional attachment challenge.
An Istanbul Law Firm advising on challenging ihtiyati tedbir orders must explain that the challenge procedure for provisional injunctive relief under HMK differs from the ihtiyati haciz itiraz. Under HMK Article 394, a party subject to an ihtiyati tedbir that was granted ex parte (without prior hearing) can apply to have the relief set aside (kaldırılması) or modified (değiştirilmesi) by applying to the court that granted it and requesting a hearing. The HMK does not prescribe a specific deadline for this application — unlike the İİK's 7-day itiraz period — but it must be filed promptly after the party becomes aware of the relief. In the hearing, the court hears both parties and can: maintain the ihtiyati tedbir; modify the scope of the relief to make it more proportionate; require the applicant to post a higher bond; or set aside the relief entirely if the applicant cannot demonstrate the continuing need for it. If the provisional measure is set aside, the applicant is liable for the harm caused to the respondent by the measure during its operation, and the respondent can enforce this liability against the applicant's bond. Practice may vary — verify current HMK Article 394 ihtiyati tedbir challenge procedure requirements and the specific proportionality and necessity standards applied by courts in provisional injunction modification hearings before any provisional relief challenge.
A lawyer in Turkey advising on bond substitution as an alternative to full challenge must explain that both ihtiyati haciz and ihtiyati tedbir can frequently be resolved through a bond substitution arrangement — where the debtor or respondent posts a bond of equivalent value to the attached assets or the protected right, and the court lifts the provisional measure in exchange for the bond. Bond substitution is available for ihtiyati haciz under İİK Article 266(2), which allows the debtor to provide security (teminat) in place of the provisional attachment. For ihtiyati tedbir, bond substitution is available where the disputed assets can be adequately protected through a bond that compensates the applicant in the event the main proceedings are ultimately decided in their favor. Bond substitution is often commercially preferable to a formal challenge because it allows the debtor or respondent to regain use of the attached assets more quickly than waiting for the challenge proceedings to conclude — while giving the creditor or applicant equivalent financial protection. The practical question is the form of bond acceptable to the court — cash deposits, bank letters of guarantee, and in some cases real estate mortgages have all been accepted in Turkish court practice. Practice may vary — verify current Turkish court bond substitution acceptance standards for both ihtiyati haciz and ihtiyati tedbir and the specific guarantee formats that courts currently accept before any bond substitution proposal. Practice may vary — check current guidance before acting on any information on this page.
Enforcement coordination — icra müdürlüğü and registry annotation
An English speaking lawyer in Turkey advising on provisional attachment enforcement must explain that granting the court's ihtiyati haciz order is only the first step — the attachment becomes legally effective only when it is implemented through the enforcement office (icra müdürlüğü) and the relevant asset registries, and delays in implementation create windows during which the debtor can dissipate assets before the attachment takes effect. For bank account attachments, the enforcement office issues a formal freezing instruction (haciz yazısı) to each bank where the debtor has accounts — and the creditor must provide the enforcement office with accurate bank identification information to enable the freezing instruction to be sent to the right institution. For real estate, the enforcement office sends an annotation request to the relevant land registry directorate (tapu müdürlüğü), and the annotation is recorded in the title deed file, preventing any subsequent registration of a transfer or encumbrance. For company shares in private limited companies (limited şirket), the annotation is recorded in the company's share ledger; for publicly listed companies, the annotation is registered with the Central Securities Depository (MKK/MKDS). Practice may vary by authority and year — verify current enforcement office ihtiyati haciz implementation procedures and the specific bank, land registry, and share registry notification requirements applicable to the identified asset categories before any enforcement action.
A Turkish Law Firm advising on the asset identification stage must explain that a provisional attachment or injunction is only as effective as the quality of the asset identification underlying it — and poorly identified assets create enforcement gaps that allow dissipation to continue in the spaces between the freeze. Effective asset identification for ihtiyati haciz enforcement requires: bank identification (identifying which Turkish banks hold accounts for the debtor, obtained through enforcement office bank inquiry processes or through the e-Devlet integrated inquiry system); real estate identification (identifying properties registered in the debtor's name through the General Directorate of Land Registry's inquiry system); vehicle identification (identifying vehicles registered to the debtor through the Traffic Directorate); and company share identification (identifying the debtor's shareholdings in Turkish companies through the commercial registry). For a debtor with significant assets, the identification process should be conducted simultaneously with the provisional attachment application rather than sequentially — because the gap between the court's order and the enforcement office's implementation can allow asset transfers if the debtor becomes aware of the proceedings. Practice may vary — verify current asset identification inquiry procedures available to Turkish enforcement offices and the specific e-Devlet inquiry tools available to creditors represented by counsel before designing any asset identification strategy for a provisional attachment.
A lawyer in Turkey advising on post-implementation monitoring must explain that provisional measures require active monitoring after implementation — because assets can be transferred through transactions that precede the attachment annotation's registration, debtors may have assets at financial institutions that were not identified in the initial inquiry, and attachment annotations at specific registries can be challenged or revised in ways that affect the freeze's effectiveness. Post-implementation monitoring should include: periodic confirmation from the enforcement office that the attachment annotations remain in place at all relevant registries; monitoring of the debtor's commercial registry entries for changes in shareholding structure, management, or registered address; and monitoring for any transfer attempts that occurred between the court's order and the registry annotations (which may create challenges for the annotation's effectiveness against bona fide third-party purchasers who completed a transfer before the annotation was registered). We maintain systematic monitoring protocols for all provisional measures mandates — because the value of a provisional attachment is determined by its continued effectiveness through the main proceedings, not just at the moment it is granted. Practice may vary — verify current enforcement office monitoring procedures and the specific registry monitoring tools available to creditors during the provisional attachment period. The enforcement and execution framework is analyzed in the resource on enforcement of court judgments in Turkey.
Cross-border civil asset freezing and international enforcement
An Istanbul Law Firm advising on cross-border provisional measures must explain that Turkish provisional attachment orders (ihtiyati haciz) and provisional injunctions (ihtiyati tedbir) are Turkish judicial acts that create immediate legal effects at Turkish asset registries and financial institutions — but that extending their effect to assets held in foreign jurisdictions requires separate legal action in each foreign jurisdiction. Turkey does not have a general multilateral treaty providing for automatic recognition of Turkish provisional measures in foreign courts (comparable to, for example, the EU's Brussels I Regulation for EU member states). Foreign enforcement of Turkish provisional measures typically requires: initiating parallel provisional measures proceedings in the foreign jurisdiction under the foreign jurisdiction's domestic law; using mutual legal assistance treaty (MLAT) channels where the dispute involves criminal elements; or relying on contractual enforcement mechanisms (freezing or escrow clauses in commercial contracts) where the parties have agreed to such mechanisms in advance. Practice may vary by authority and year — verify current Turkish civil court guidance on cross-border provisional measures enforcement and the specific bilateral or multilateral treaty framework applicable to assets in the relevant foreign jurisdiction before any cross-border provisional measures strategy.
A law firm in Istanbul advising on foreign provisional measures for Turkish-connected disputes must explain that foreign creditors and disputants who need to freeze assets in Turkey can apply directly to Turkish courts for provisional measures under HMK and İİK — and Turkish courts have jurisdiction to grant provisional measures where the Turkish connection is established, regardless of where the underlying dispute will be resolved. A foreign creditor with a claim against a Turkish debtor who holds assets in Turkey can apply to the Turkish commercial court for an ihtiyati haciz against those Turkish assets, even if the main dispute will be resolved by a foreign court or international arbitration. Similarly, a foreign company can obtain an ihtiyati tedbir from a Turkish court to prevent a Turkish counterparty from taking specific harmful action in Turkey, even where the underlying contract provides for foreign law and foreign jurisdiction. The key question for jurisdiction over Turkish provisional measures is whether there are assets, events, or parties in Turkey that can be affected by the Turkish court's order — not where the main dispute will ultimately be decided. Practice may vary — verify current Turkish court jurisdictional standards for provisional measures applications by foreign parties and the specific Turkish connection criteria required before any foreign party provisional measures application in Turkey.
An English speaking lawyer in Turkey advising on provisional measures in international arbitration must explain that parties to international commercial arbitration proceedings (whether seated in Turkey or abroad) have the right to apply to Turkish courts for provisional measures in support of the arbitration under both the International Arbitration Law (Milletlerarası Tahkim Kanunu, Law No. 4686) and the HMK's general provisional measures provisions. The availability of court provisional measures in support of arbitration is particularly significant for arbitrations involving Turkish assets — because the arbitral tribunal may not yet be constituted at the time the provisional measures are needed, and because even a constituted tribunal's interim orders require court enforcement through the Turkish court system to be effective against Turkish asset registries. A party to an international arbitration who needs to freeze Turkish assets can apply to the Turkish court with territorial jurisdiction over the assets for provisional measures, presenting the arbitration agreement and the prima facie case as the basis for the relief. Practice may vary — verify current Turkish court practice on provisional measures in support of international arbitration and the specific requirements for demonstrating the arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction before any court-based provisional measures application in an international arbitration context. The international arbitration framework is analyzed in the resource on international arbitration in Turkey: a legal guide for foreign companies. Practice may vary — check current guidance before acting on any information on this page.
Asset release and post-judgment lifting of provisional measures
A Turkish Law Firm advising on the release of provisional measures after judgment must explain that provisional attachment and provisional injunctive relief do not automatically convert into final enforcement measures when the applicant wins the main case — they must be specifically addressed in the judgment and then enforced through separate final enforcement proceedings. For ihtiyati haciz, when the creditor obtains a final and executable judgment, the provisional attachment can be converted into a formal enforcement action (kesin haciz) through the enforcement office — the temporary provisional attachment becomes the foundation for the final attachment that supports enforcement execution (icra takibi). For ihtiyati tedbir, when the applicant wins the main case and obtains a final judgment granting the substantive relief, the provisional injunction may need to be converted into a permanent injunction through a separate court application, or the provisional measure may become moot because the final judgment provides the definitive relief. If the applicant loses the main case, the provisional measure must be lifted — and the applicant becomes liable to the respondent for the harm caused by the measure under HMK Article 399 (ihtiyati tedbir) or İİK Article 259 (ihtiyati haciz). Practice may vary by authority and year — verify current Turkish court procedures for converting provisional attachment to final enforcement and the specific liability standards for wrongful provisional measures before any post-judgment asset release or enforcement strategy.
An Istanbul Law Firm advising on using provisional measures as settlement leverage must explain that provisional attachment and provisional injunctions frequently serve as powerful settlement tools — particularly in commercial disputes where the provisional measure disrupts the respondent's business operations, banking relationships, or commercial reputation more severely than the underlying claim amount would justify. A provisional attachment that freezes a company's operating account, or a provisional injunction that prevents a company from using a critical business asset, creates commercial pressure that frequently produces settlement discussions even where the respondent believes the underlying claim is weak. This settlement leverage dynamic is a legitimate and common feature of Turkish commercial litigation practice — and the decision to pursue provisional measures as part of a commercial dispute strategy should explicitly consider the settlement leverage impact alongside the substantive asset protection goal. Provisional measures that are disproportionately disruptive relative to the underlying claim can, however, produce adverse consequences: courts may reduce the scope of the measure on a challenge if it appears to be designed for harassment rather than legitimate asset protection, and losing respondents who successfully challenge an excessive measure may recover damages under the wrongful provisional measures provisions. Practice may vary — verify current Turkish commercial court proportionality standards for provisional measures in commercial disputes and the specific circumstances that courts consider as evidence of disproportionate or abusive provisional measures use before any settlement leverage provisional measures strategy.
A lawyer in Turkey advising on compliance audits before asset release must explain that before lifting a provisional attachment or provisional injunction, a creditor or applicant should conduct a compliance review confirming that: all conditions specified in the court's lifting order have been satisfied; the released assets do not have other encumbrances (tax liens, security interests, other attachments) that would affect their free disposition; the release mechanism has been properly communicated to all relevant registries and financial institutions; and any related proceedings (such as tax payment obligations, compliance with settlement agreement conditions, or submission of required documentation) have been completed. A release that occurs without a systematic compliance review can result in an incomplete lift — where some registries have been notified but others have not — leaving the subject of the provisional measure partially encumbered by stale annotation records that were not properly removed. We prepare formal asset release checklists for every provisional measures mandate that specifically identify each institution and registry that must be notified of the release, and track confirmation from each before declaring the release complete. Practice may vary — verify current Turkish land registry, bank, and enforcement office release confirmation procedures before any provisional measures lifting action. Practice may vary — check current guidance before acting on any information on this page.
Corporate and shareholder disputes — specific applications of provisional measures
An English speaking lawyer in Turkey advising on provisional measures in Turkish corporate disputes must explain that corporate and shareholder disputes represent one of the most significant application areas for provisional measures in Turkish commercial practice — and the HMK's ihtiyati tedbir framework has been specifically used by Turkish courts in shareholder disputes to prevent specific harmful corporate actions while litigation is pending. Provisional injunctions have been granted in Turkish corporate dispute practice to prevent: a majority shareholder from registering a general assembly resolution that the minority claims was adopted in violation of shareholder rights; the transfer of company shares to third parties pending a shareholder dispute about the validity of a share transfer; the board of directors from implementing a specific transaction (such as an asset sale, a new share issuance, or a management agreement) that the petitioner claims is a breach of fiduciary duties; and the filing of corporate registry applications that would change the company's governance or ownership structure while the dispute is pending. Practice may vary by authority and year — verify current Turkish commercial court ihtiyati tedbir practice in shareholder disputes and the specific urgency and irreparable harm standards applied before any corporate dispute provisional measures application.
A Turkish Law Firm advising on sequestration (yediemin) as a provisional measure must explain that one of the specific forms of ihtiyati tedbir available under HMK is the appointment of a yediemin (sequestrator or custodian) — a court-appointed person who takes custody of and manages disputed assets pending the resolution of the main dispute. Sequestration is particularly useful where: the disputed assets are productive assets (such as a business, a real estate investment that generates rental income, or a portfolio of investments) that should be managed rather than merely frozen; neither party can be trusted to manage the assets without favoring their own interests; or the assets require active management to preserve their value during the litigation period. A yediemin takes custody of the assets, manages them in accordance with the court's instructions, and accounts to the court for their management. The yediemin's fees are typically charged against the managed assets or allocated between the parties by the court. Practice may vary — verify current Turkish court yediemin appointment standards and the specific managed asset categories for which sequestration is regularly ordered before any sequestration application.
A lawyer in Turkey advising on provisional measures in real estate disputes must explain that Turkish real estate disputes — title disputes, boundary disputes, co-ownership disputes, and pre-emption right disputes — are a major application area for ihtiyati tedbir, specifically in the form of transfer and encumbrance prohibition orders (tasarruf yasağı) that prevent the registered owner from selling, mortgaging, or otherwise disposing of the disputed property pending determination of the title claim. A transfer prohibition annotation (şerh) registered at the land registry prevents any new registration of a transfer or encumbrance of the property — and it puts any potential third-party purchaser on constructive notice of the dispute, eliminating the bona fide purchaser protection that would otherwise apply. The transfer prohibition application should be filed simultaneously with the main title action, so that the annotation is registered as early as possible in the land registry and no gap exists between the dispute's commencement and the registry's notification. Practice may vary — verify current Turkish land registry transfer prohibition annotation procedures and the specific evidentiary requirements for the prima facie case in ihtiyati tedbir applications for real estate title disputes before any real estate provisional measures application. The real estate dispute framework is analyzed in the resource on real estate disputes in Turkey: legal resolution framework. Practice may vary — check current guidance before acting on any information on this page.
How we work in civil asset freezing mandates
A best lawyer in Turkey managing a civil or commercial provisional measures mandate begins with an instrument selection assessment: is the underlying claim a monetary claim that should be secured through ihtiyati haciz (provisional attachment under İİK), or is it a non-monetary rights protection that should be addressed through ihtiyati tedbir (provisional injunction under HMK)? This initial selection determines the correct court (enforcement court vs. civil court), the applicable legal standard (İİK Article 257's risk conditions vs. HMK Article 389's irreparable harm standard), the bond calculation methodology, the enforcement mechanism (enforcement office attachment vs. court order implementation), and the challenge procedure available to the respondent (İİK Article 265 itiraz vs. HMK Article 394 modification application). Getting the instrument selection right before filing is the most important single decision in a provisional measures mandate — because a mismatched application will be dismissed and the time lost to the dismissal may allow the asset dissipation or rights violation that the measure was designed to prevent.
ER&GUN&ER advises creditors, debtors, applicants, and respondents across the full spectrum of Turkish civil and commercial provisional measures — İİK Articles 257-268 ihtiyati haciz application drafting and enforcement, HMK Articles 389-399 ihtiyati tedbir application and implementation, bond calculation and guarantor sourcing, enforcement office and registry coordination, asset identification through enforcement inquiry systems, main case filing deadline management, İİK Article 265 itiraz preparation and hearing representation, HMK Article 394 modification and lifting applications, bond substitution negotiations, settlement leverage strategy, sequestration (yediemin) applications, corporate dispute provisional measures (transfer prohibitions, general assembly injunctions), real estate dispute transfer prohibition annotations, post-judgment provisional-to-final enforcement conversion, wrongful provisional measures compensation claims, and cross-border provisional measures coordination. We work in English throughout all international mandates. For the criminal asset seizure and confiscation framework — covering CMK Article 128 and TCK Articles 54-55 — see the resource on asset confiscation in Turkish criminal investigations. For the AML and bank freeze intersection — see the resource on asset freezing at the narcotics-AML intersection in Turkey. Practice may vary — check current guidance before acting on any information on this page.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is the difference between ihtiyati haciz and ihtiyati tedbir? Ihtiyati haciz is provisional attachment under İİK Articles 257-268, specifically for securing the enforcement of future monetary judgments — it requires a liquid or near-liquid monetary claim and a specific risk condition (debtor flight, asset hiding, no fixed domicile). İhtiyati tedbir is provisional injunctive relief under HMK Articles 389-399, available for both monetary and non-monetary claims — it requires showing that without the measure, obtaining the right or claim would become significantly more difficult or impossible. The instruments have different courts, different bond standards, and different challenge procedures. Applying the wrong instrument to a dispute creates procedural complications and delays. Practice may vary — verify the appropriate instrument for your specific claim type.
- What conditions must be met for provisional attachment (ihtiyati haciz) under İİK? İİK Article 257 requires two concurrent conditions: first, the claim must be liquid or near-liquid (a specific monetary amount established at least prima facie); second, one of the following risk conditions must exist — the debtor has no fixed domicile in Turkey; the debtor is preparing to flee from their obligations; or the debtor is hiding or preparing to hide or transfer assets. Both conditions must be established with documentary evidence. A general assertion of risk without specific supporting evidence is insufficient. Practice may vary — verify current ihtiyati haciz admissibility standards at the relevant court.
- How is the bond amount determined for provisional measures? For ihtiyati haciz, the bond is typically approximately 15% of the claimed amount under İİK Article 266, though courts have discretion to set higher amounts. For ihtiyati tedbir, HMK Article 392 requires a bond but does not specify a percentage — courts determine the bond based on the value of the affected right, the potential harm to the respondent, and the strength of the prima facie case. Bonds can typically be posted as cash deposits or bank letters of guarantee (banka teminat mektubu) from licensed Turkish banks. Practice may vary — verify current bond percentage standards at the relevant court.
- What is the deadline to file the main case after obtaining provisional measures? For ihtiyati haciz: the enforcement proceedings (icra takibi) or main lawsuit must be initiated within 10 days of the attachment under İİK Article 264, if main proceedings were not already filed. For ihtiyati tedbir: the main lawsuit must be filed within 2 weeks of the provisional measure's implementation under HMK Article 397, if the provisional measure was obtained before the main lawsuit was filed. Missing these deadlines causes the provisional measure to lapse automatically and can trigger liability to the respondent for the harm caused by the measure. Practice may vary — verify current deadline calculation standards.
- How can a debtor challenge an ihtiyati haciz order? Under İİK Article 265, the debtor can file an itiraz (objection) within 7 days of notification of the attachment. The objection is filed with the court that granted the attachment and can raise any ground showing the attachment was not legally justified — no prima facie claim, the specific risk condition was not met, the attached assets don't belong to the debtor, or the attachment is disproportionate. The court holds a hearing and can lift, reduce, or maintain the attachment. An unfavorable decision can be appealed to the Regional Court of Appeals. Practice may vary — verify current İİK Article 265 procedure.
- Can a respondent substitute a bond for attached assets? Yes — both ihtiyati haciz and ihtiyati tedbir can be released in exchange for an equivalent bond. For ihtiyati haciz, İİK Article 266(2) specifically allows the debtor to provide security in place of the attachment. The bond form must be acceptable to the court — typically cash deposit or bank letter of guarantee. Bond substitution allows the debtor to regain use of attached assets more quickly than formal challenge proceedings while giving the creditor equivalent financial protection. Practice may vary — verify current bond substitution acceptance standards at the relevant court.
- How is a provisional attachment implemented at a Turkish bank? The enforcement office (icra müdürlüğü) sends a formal freezing instruction (haciz yazısı) to the bank, directing it to block withdrawal from the debtor's accounts up to the attached amount. The creditor must provide accurate bank identification information to the enforcement office. The bank's obligation to implement the instruction is immediate upon receipt. Banks that fail to implement a provisional attachment instruction can face fines. The creditor should follow up with the bank through the enforcement office to confirm the instruction has been received and implemented. Practice may vary — verify current enforcement office bank notification procedures.
- Can provisional measures be obtained for assets held outside Turkey? Turkish provisional measures directly affect Turkish asset registries and financial institutions. Extending their effect to foreign assets requires separate legal action in each foreign jurisdiction. Foreign enforcement of Turkish provisional measures typically requires: parallel provisional measures proceedings in the foreign jurisdiction under local law; mutual legal assistance channels for criminally-connected disputes; or contractual enforcement mechanisms agreed in advance. Foreign creditors can apply directly to Turkish courts for provisional measures against Turkish assets, even if the main dispute will be resolved abroad. Practice may vary — verify applicable bilateral treaty framework for the relevant foreign jurisdiction.
- Are company shares attachable under ihtiyati haciz? Yes — company shares in private limited companies (limited şirket) can be attached through an annotation in the company's share ledger; shares in publicly listed companies can be attached through the Central Securities Depository (MKK/MKDS). The enforcement office sends attachment instructions to the relevant registry. An attached company share cannot be transferred while the attachment annotation remains in place. The share's economic rights (dividends) may continue to accrue but their distribution may be restricted by the attachment. Practice may vary — verify current share attachment implementation procedures.
- What happens if the provisional measure causes harm and the applicant loses the main case? If the applicant loses the main case, the provisional measure is lifted and the applicant becomes liable to the respondent for the harm caused by the measure during its operation — under HMK Article 399 for ihtiyati tedbir and İİK Article 259 for ihtiyati haciz. The respondent can pursue these damages against the applicant's bond. This liability risk is why proportionality in designing the provisional measures application is important — an excessive provisional measure creates greater potential liability than a proportionate one. Practice may vary — verify current wrongful provisional measures compensation standards.
- Can provisional measures be used in international arbitration cases? Yes — under both Law No. 4686 (International Arbitration Law) and HMK's general provisional measures provisions, Turkish courts can grant provisional measures in support of international arbitration, including arbitrations seated abroad. This is particularly significant for freezing Turkish assets pending international arbitration outcomes. The arbitration agreement and prima facie case are presented to the Turkish court as the basis for the relief. The arbitral tribunal's interim orders require Turkish court enforcement to affect Turkish asset registries. Practice may vary — verify current Turkish court provisional measures standards for international arbitration support applications.
- What is a yediemin (sequestrator) and when is sequestration used? A yediemin is a court-appointed sequestrator who takes custody of and manages disputed assets pending the resolution of the main dispute — a specific form of ihtiyati tedbir. Sequestration is used where neither party can be trusted to manage disputed assets neutrally, where the assets require active management to preserve their value, or where the assets are productive (generating income that must be managed). The yediemin accounts to the court for asset management. Sequestration fees are typically charged against the managed assets or allocated between parties. Practice may vary — verify current sequestration application standards for the specific asset category.
- Can a provisional injunction stop a general assembly resolution in a shareholder dispute? Yes — Turkish commercial courts have granted provisional injunctions preventing the registration of general assembly resolutions that the petitioner claims were adopted in violation of shareholder rights, preventing share transfers pending ownership dispute litigation, and preventing specific board decisions that are alleged to breach fiduciary duties. The ihtiyati tedbir must demonstrate that the implementation of the challenged resolution or action would cause irreparable harm to the petitioner's rights that could not be remedied through damages alone. Practice may vary — verify current commercial court ihtiyati tedbir standards in corporate disputes.
- How is a provisional measure lifted after the main case concludes? For ihtiyati haciz that converts to final enforcement: the provisional attachment becomes the basis for final enforcement proceedings after the creditor obtains an executable judgment. For provisional measures that are no longer needed: a formal lifting application must be filed with the court, accompanied by the judgment or settlement agreement that resolves the dispute. The court issues a lifting order, and the enforcement office notifies all relevant registries and financial institutions of the release. A systematic release checklist confirming receipt of lifting notification from all relevant institutions should be obtained before the release is considered complete. Practice may vary — verify current release notification procedures.
- What should a party do if assets are transferred in violation of a provisional attachment? A transfer of attached assets in violation of a provisional attachment annotation is a criminal offense under Turkish law and can give rise to the transferor's criminal liability. The creditor should immediately notify the enforcement office of the unauthorized transfer; document the transfer through land registry or bank records; apply to the court that granted the attachment for appropriate remedies; and where applicable, file a criminal complaint about the unauthorized transfer. The bona fide purchaser protection for unauthorized transfers made after a properly registered provisional attachment annotation may be limited because the annotation provides constructive notice. Practice may vary — verify current Turkish court and enforcement office remedies for unauthorized transfers of attached assets.
Author: Mirkan Topcu is an attorney registered with the Istanbul Bar Association (Istanbul 1st Bar), Bar Registration No: 67874. His practice focuses on cross-border and high-stakes matters where evidence discipline, procedural accuracy, and risk control are decisive.
He advises creditors, debtors, applicants, and respondents across İhtiyati Haciz Application and Enforcement (İİK Articles 257-268), İhtiyati Tedbir Application and Implementation (HMK Articles 389-399), Bond Calculation and Guarantor Sourcing, Enforcement Office and Registry Coordination, Asset Identification, Main Case Filing Deadline Management, İİK Article 265 Itiraz Representation, HMK Article 394 Modification Applications, Bond Substitution Negotiations, Sequestration (Yediemin) Applications, Corporate Dispute Provisional Measures, Real Estate Transfer Prohibition Annotations, Post-Judgment Enforcement Conversion, Wrongful Provisional Measures Compensation Claims, and Cross-Border Provisional Measures Coordination matters where procedural precision and timing are decisive.
Education: Istanbul University Faculty of Law (2018); Galatasaray University, LL.M. (2022). LinkedIn: Profile. Istanbul Bar Association: Official website.