Enforcement of Court Judgments — Process and Procedures for Judgment Enforcement

The compulsory enforcement of court decisions (judgments) is one of the fundamental requirements of the rule of law principle. When a debtor fails to fulfil their obligation despite a court judgment rendered in favour of the creditor, the creditor may resort to judgment enforcement proceedings to ensure execution of the decision through state power. The Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004 (EBL) regulates judgment enforcement proceedings under Articles 24-41. This article comprehensively examines the definition of judgment enforcement, judgments and documents equivalent to judgments, enforcement orders, objection procedures, enforcement of monetary claims, delivery of movable and immovable property, and child custody enforcement.

What Is Judgment Enforcement and How Does It Differ from Non-Judgment Enforcement?

Judgment enforcement is the enforcement procedure pursued when the creditor holds a court judgment or a document equivalent to a judgment. The fundamental difference from non-judgment enforcement is that the claim is documented by a judicial decision or a document given judgment status by law. Therefore, the debtor's ability to object in judgment enforcement proceedings is considerably limited.

The main advantages of judgment enforcement over non-judgment enforcement are as follows: First, even if the debtor objects to the debt, the proceedings do not automatically stop; the debtor must apply to the enforcement court to have the proceedings suspended. Second, judgment enforcement can be initiated at any enforcement office throughout Turkey; jurisdictional objection is not applicable (EBL Art. 34). Third, since the existence and amount of the claim have been established by court decision, there is no issue of proof.

The subject matter of judgment enforcement is not limited to monetary claims. In addition to monetary claims, matters such as delivery of movable property, eviction and delivery of immovable property, performance or non-performance of an act, establishment of easement rights, child custody and personal contact with children may also be subject to judgment enforcement.

What Is a Judgment and What Are Documents Equivalent to Judgments?

A judgment is the decision rendered by the court at the conclusion of proceedings that resolves the dispute between the parties. As a rule, a judgment does not need to be finalised in order to be enforced; non-finalised judgments may also be enforced (EBL Art. 36). However, certain types of judgments must be finalised before enforcement: primarily judgments relating to family law (excluding divorce, custody and maintenance), judgments relating to immovable property ownership, negative declaratory judgments and decisions for retrial.

Documents equivalent to judgments are documents that the law accepts as enforceable in the same manner as judgments. EBL Art. 38 lists documents equivalent to judgments: settlements made before the court, admissions made before the court, notarial deeds in the form of a public instrument containing an unconditional acknowledgment of monetary debt, appellate and cassation bail bonds, and enforcement bail bonds. Additionally, documents specified as having judgment status in special laws fall within this scope; for example, arbitral awards (CPC Art. 439) and mediation settlement agreements (LMCD Art. 18) have judgment status.

For notarial deeds to have judgment status, they must contain an unconditional acknowledgment of monetary debt. The expression "unconditional" means that the debt must not be subject to any condition. Notarial deeds containing conditional debt acknowledgments are not considered equivalent to judgments and cannot be subject to judgment enforcement.

What Is an Enforcement Order and What Does It Contain?

An enforcement order is the notification sent to the debtor in judgment enforcement proceedings and is regulated under EBL Art. 32. The enforcement order is different in nature from the payment order in non-judgment enforcement. The enforcement order instructs the debtor to fulfil the obligation specified in the judgment within 7 days; otherwise, the judgment will be compulsorily enforced.

The enforcement order contains the following: identity information of the creditor and debtor, the court, date and number of the judgment on which the proceedings are based, the amount of the awarded claim (principal, interest, litigation costs and attorney's fees), notice to pay the debt within 7 days, and notification that compulsory enforcement will continue in case of non-payment.

Service of the enforcement order is carried out pursuant to the provisions of the Notification Law, similar to service of the payment order in non-judgment enforcement. However, in judgment enforcement, no enforcement action may be taken before the enforcement order is served on the debtor. Failure to properly serve the enforcement order constitutes grounds for cancellation of the proceedings.

What Are the Debtor's Objection Procedures in Judgment Enforcement?

The debtor's ability to object in judgment enforcement is considerably more limited compared to non-judgment enforcement. The debtor cannot object to the enforcement order at the enforcement office; instead, they may apply to the enforcement court to request cancellation or postponement of the proceedings (EBL Art. 33).

The grounds for objection that the debtor may raise against judgment enforcement are exhaustively listed in EBL Art. 33. These grounds are: that the debt has been paid (satisfaction), that the debt has been postponed (respite), and that the debt has become time-barred. Specific evidentiary requirements apply for raising these objections.

Satisfaction (Payment) Claim: The debtor may claim that the debt awarded in the judgment has been fully or partially paid. To prove a satisfaction claim, the debtor must present written evidence (receipt, bank statement, transfer document, etc.) (EBL Art. 33/1). A satisfaction claim cannot be proved through witness testimony alone.

Respite (Postponement) Claim: The debtor may claim that the creditor has granted them additional time to pay the debt. Written evidence is also required to prove a respite claim. Verbal extensions of time cannot be raised before the enforcement court.

Statute of Limitations Claim: Proceedings must be initiated within a specific limitation period for judgments to be enforced. Pursuant to Turkish Code of Obligations Art. 156/2, the limitation period for claims established by court judgment is 10 years from the date the judgment becomes final. The debtor may request cancellation of proceedings by claiming that the 10-year limitation period has expired.

The debtor's objection to judgment enforcement does not automatically stop the proceedings. For the debtor to achieve suspension of proceedings, they must obtain a decision for postponement of enforcement from the enforcement court (EBL Art. 33/2). The enforcement court may decide to postpone enforcement after evaluating the evidence presented by the debtor; however, the debtor may be required to provide security for this purpose.

How Is Enforcement of Monetary Claims Carried Out?

Enforcement of judgments relating to monetary claims is the most common area of application for judgment enforcement. The creditor may collect the principal, interest, litigation costs and attorney's fees awarded in the court judgment through the enforcement office.

If the debt is not paid within the 7-day period following service of the enforcement order on the debtor, the creditor may request attachment. The attachment request must be made within 1 year from service of the enforcement order; otherwise, the file is shelved (EBL Art. 78). Attachment may be applied to the debtor's movable and immovable assets, bank accounts, salary and claims against third parties.

Sale of attached assets must be requested within 6 months from attachment for movable assets and within 1 year for immovable assets (EBL Art. 106). Sale is carried out by public auction as a rule. The sale proceeds are applied to the creditor's claim, enforcement costs and, if applicable, the claims of other creditors.

Interest calculation in judgment enforcement is made according to the interest rate and type specified in the judgment. If the judgment contains a provision regarding interest, that provision is applied; if the judgment contains no provision regarding interest, the statutory interest rate is applied. After the enforcement proceedings become final, interest continues to accrue at the interest rate applicable to the principal claim.

How Is Enforcement of Movable Property Delivery Carried Out?

Delivery of movable property arises when the court decides that a specific movable asset must be delivered by the debtor to the creditor (EBL Art. 24). If the debtor does not deliver the movable asset within 7 days of service of the enforcement order, the enforcement office forcibly takes the asset from the debtor and delivers it to the creditor.

If the movable asset is not in the debtor's possession, two scenarios arise: First, if the movable asset is in the possession of a third party who claims it as their own property, the third-party claim procedure is applied. Second, if the movable asset no longer exists for any reason (destroyed, lost, etc.), the debtor must pay the value of the asset as stated in the judgment. If the value of the asset is not specified in the judgment, the enforcement court determines the value through an expert and sends the debtor a payment order for this amount (EBL Art. 24/4).

In judgment enforcement relating to delivery of movable property, the distinguishing characteristics of the asset (brand, model, serial number, etc.) should be specified in the judgment. Otherwise, it becomes difficult for the enforcement office to determine which asset to deliver, and problems may arise in practice.

How Is Enforcement of Immovable Property Eviction and Delivery Carried Out?

Eviction and delivery of immovable property is applied when the court decides that the debtor must vacate a specific immovable property and deliver it to the creditor (EBL Art. 26). The debtor is given time to vacate the immovable property following service of the enforcement order.

The time given to the debtor in immovable property eviction varies according to the nature of the judgment. In judgments relating to eviction and delivery of real property, the debtor is given 7 days from service of the enforcement order. If the debtor does not vacate the property within this period, the enforcement office forcibly evicts the property and delivers it to the creditor (EBL Art. 26/2).

During the eviction process, the debtor's belongings found in the property are delivered to the debtor. If the debtor is not present, the belongings are left with a custodian and the debtor is notified of this. The debtor must collect their belongings within a specified period; otherwise, the belongings are sold and the proceeds are deposited into the debtor's account.

If there are third parties (tenants, family members, etc.) in the property other than the debtor, their situation is evaluated separately. If the judgment is directed only at the debtor and the third parties have an independent legal basis (such as a lease agreement), a separate action may need to be filed against these persons.

How Is Child Custody and Personal Contact with Children Enforced?

Enforcement of child custody and personal contact with children is one of the most sensitive matters in family law and is regulated under EBL Art. 25-25/a-25/b. In such enforcement proceedings, the principle of the best interests of the child is always observed.

The judgment regarding the change of custody or exercise of custody is served on the debtor (the party obligated to hand over the child) by the enforcement office. If the debtor does not hand over the child within 7 days of service of the enforcement order, the enforcement office goes to the location where the child is and delivers the child to the creditor (the party with custody).

In child custody operations, it is of great importance to act with specialist accompaniment. The enforcement officer carries out the handover operation accompanied by a psychologist, pedagogue or social services expert to safeguard the child's psychological condition. The use of force during child handover should be a last resort, as it may negatively affect the child's physical and psychological health.

Enforcement of judgments regarding personal contact with children is conducted similarly. The party with personal contact rights has the right to meet with the child on specified days and at specified times. If the other party obstructs this right, the enforcement office is applied to for the child's handover. If the personal contact right is continuously obstructed, it is also possible to file a custody modification action.

Postponement of Enforcement and Stay of Execution in Judgment Enforcement

Postponement of enforcement is the suspension of proceedings when the objection grounds raised by the debtor are accepted by the enforcement court (EBL Art. 33). Stay of execution (tehir-i icra) is the decision to suspend enforcement obtained from an appellate court when the debtor takes the court decision to a higher court (appeal or cassation) (EBL Art. 36).

To obtain a stay of execution, the debtor must follow these steps: First, they must file an appeal or cassation appeal against the first instance court's decision. Then, they must obtain a stay of execution decision along with an annotation (endorsement on the judgment) from the first instance court. Finally, they must apply to the enforcement office and deposit security (cash, bank guarantee letter, etc.) equal to the total of the full awarded claim plus three months' interest (EBL Art. 36). If the security is deposited and the required documents are submitted, the enforcement office suspends enforcement proceedings.

The duration of the stay of execution continues until the appellate court renders its decision. If the appellate court's decision is finalised against the debtor, the security is paid to the creditor and enforcement proceedings continue. If the decision is reversed in favour of the debtor, the security is returned to the debtor.

Statutes of Limitations and Time Periods in Judgment Enforcement

The statute of limitations in judgment enforcement is 10 years from the date the judgment becomes final (TCO Art. 156/2). If the judgment is not enforced within this period, the claim becomes time-barred and the debtor may raise a statute of limitations objection. The limitation period is interrupted by the initiation of proceedings or the conduct of any enforcement action in the proceedings.

Other important time periods in judgment enforcement are as follows: 7-day payment period from service of the enforcement order, attachment request must be made within 1 year from service of the enforcement order, sale of movable assets must be requested within 6 months from attachment, and sale of immovable assets must be requested within 1 year from attachment.

If these periods are missed, the enforcement file is shelved but the right to the claim does not expire. The creditor may initiate new proceedings within the limitation period. Expiry of the limitation period means the claim right has expired, and the debtor's limitation objection leads to cancellation of proceedings.

Judgment Enforcement Practice in Light of Court of Cassation Precedents

The Court of Cassation has issued many important decisions regarding judgment enforcement. According to the Court of Cassation's settled case law, judgments that cannot be enforced without finalisation are limited in number, and expansive interpretation should not be applied in this regard. For judgments that can be enforced without finalisation, the creditor's right to apply for enforcement arises upon service of the judgment on the parties.

The Court of Cassation emphasises that the debtor must prove their claims of satisfaction, respite and statute of limitations by written evidence when objecting to an enforcement order. Bank statements, transfer receipts and payment notifications made through a notary public are accepted as written evidence. However, satisfaction claims based solely on witness testimony are not accepted.

In the enforcement of child custody and personal contact with children, the Court of Cassation emphasises at every opportunity that the best interests of the child must be observed. It states that the use of force in a manner that would endanger the child's physical and psychological health is contrary to law, and has established precedent that enforcement proceedings must be conducted with specialist accompaniment.

Final note: This content is for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. It is recommended that you seek professional support from a lawyer for your specific legal issues.