Interim Injunction and Precautionary Attachment: How to Protect Your Rights Without Waiting for the Outcome of the Case

An interim injunction (ihtiyati tedbir) protects the right or property in dispute during the proceedings; a precautionary attachment (ihtiyati haciz), by contrast, gives temporary security over the debtor's assets so that a monetary claim whose conditions are met can be collected in the future. Preventing the transfer of a piece of real estate and having the debtor's property attached for a monetary claim are not the same procedure. The requirements, security, enforcement deadlines and objection routes must be assessed separately. [1, 2]

Being right in a lawsuit matters, but so does the right still being usable when the proceedings are concluded. The property in dispute may change hands, a situation that needs protection may deteriorate, or the debtor's attachable assets may decrease. On the other hand, the mere filing of a lawsuit does not justify restricting all of the opposing party's assets. Temporary protection is a judicial intervention whose necessity and scope must be explained with documents.

This guide covers the general system of interim injunctions and precautionary attachments in private law disputes in Türkiye. Precautionary attachment over tax claims, seizure in criminal proceedings and stay of execution in administrative litigation are governed by different rules. Special provisions in family, intellectual property, arbitration and insolvency law are also to be assessed separately in each case.

What Is the Difference Between an Interim Injunction and a Precautionary Attachment?

First identify the right to be protected

A party seeking cancellation of a title deed and its registration in its name may ask that the transfer of the property in dispute to third parties be prevented. Here, what is sought to be protected is directly the subject of the dispute; the general framework is set by HMK Article 389 and the following interim injunction provisions. By contrast, a creditor seeking payment of an unpaid purchase price does not aim to have any real estate of the debtor registered in its own name. The aim is to secure a monetary claim, and as a rule the precautionary attachment under İİK Article 257 and the following provisions is considered. [1, 2]

This distinction does not mean that an injunction is prohibited in every file involving money. There are special measures, such as the suspension of enforcement in an action for negative declaratory judgment. However, a general measure over assets that goes beyond the requirements of precautionary attachment cannot be imposed merely to secure collection of a monetary claim. The legal basis for the protection sought must be explained together with the relief requested in the file.

Table 1 — The main differences between the two temporary protections

The starting points of the periods in the table cannot be used interchangeably. The effect of mediation on certain periods for bringing an action, and the additional periods that run after enforcement proceedings have begun, are explained separately below. [1, 2, 3]

Does the label in the petition or the content of the request matter more?

In its decision of 20 May 2021, E. 2017/1796, K. 2021/607, the Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu) addressed the legal nature of a request made to secure a claim for labor receivables. The Assembly explained the different requirements of the two institutions and stated that the legal characterization belongs to the judge and that the content of the request will be taken into account. This approach shows that a single word used in a petition does not determine the outcome in every case. [5: §§25–54]

The decision does not mean that the requirements of precautionary attachment may be left incomplete. Moreover, the operative part of the decision is a procedural reversal concerning the appeal regime of that file; it cannot be read as an attachment order issued directly in favor of all creditors. A sound application sets out the facts, the type of legal protection, the amount and the action sought from the outset, rather than relying on the court to correct it.

Under What Conditions Is an Interim Injunction Granted?

Merit and the risk of delay must be explained together

Under HMK Article 389, a change in the existing situation must be such that it would significantly hinder or make impossible the attainment of the right. The fact that delay would cause harm or serious damage may also be a ground for protection. The applicant must separately show why it appears to be right in the main action and why it cannot await the ordinary outcome of the proceedings. A strong contract does not always show a need for urgent intervention; urgency does not make an unsupported claim of right sufficient. [1: Arts. 389–390]

By way of hypothesis, a party claiming that a machine whose ownership is disputed will be dismantled and taken elsewhere must show which machine it asks to be protected, on the basis of which contract, the preparations for dismantling, and the difficulty the removal would cause. A counter-document showing that the machine is already securely kept may change the need for protection or its scope. For this reason, writing only "irreparable damage will occur" is not an adequate explanation.

The measure must be clear, enforceable and proportionate

The court may order the custody of property, its deposit with a custodian (yediemin), or the performance or non-performance of a particular act. However, it must be clearly understood which property, right, record or conduct will be affected. For real estate, the parcel and the relevant share; for a vehicle, the distinguishing record; for a commercial activity, the specific transaction whose suspension is requested should be identified. A vague request to prevent "all kinds of disposal" may create new disputes in practice. [1: Art. 391]

There must be a balance between the measure requested and the harm to be prevented. If a prohibition on transfer is sufficient, blocking every use of the property requires separate justification. If the business's activity would stop entirely, the effects on employees, customers and third parties should also be considered. The opposing party may show, through a concrete alternative, that the same protection can be achieved by a more limited step.

An injunction review is not a final determination of the main action on the full body of evidence. Nevertheless, it is also wrong to treat as absolutely prohibited every measure that has an interim or enforcement effect. The temporary nature of the result sought, its reversibility, its specific statutory basis and the burden it places on the parties are assessed together. The injunction must not become an unreasoned final remedy that replaces the proceedings. For readers facing a similar situation, the article Protection of Assets in the Liquidation of a Simple Partnership may be a useful guide.

What Conditions Are Required for a Precautionary Attachment?

For a matured monetary claim, is separate proof of asset concealment required?

For a matured monetary claim not secured by a pledge, proof of a danger of asset concealment is not, under İİK Article 257(1), a general requirement. The existence, amount, maturity and security position of the claim are examined. The fact that the debtor has a regular job or a known address does not by itself prevent the request. The corollary is that not every invoice automatically produces an attachment order: the claim must be shown prima facie. [2: Arts. 257–258; 5: §§17–24]

Maturity means that the claim has become payable. In an instalment contract, only instalments whose time has come may be due; demanding the entire remaining debt requires that the conditions set by the contract and by law be met. Previous payments, refunds and valid set-offs made against the amount claimed must be reflected. The debtor's defenses that "delivery was not made", "the term was extended" or "the debt has been paid" may therefore directly affect the outcome.

Pledge, guarantee and the uncovered balance are not the same

The fact that a claim is secured by a pledge matters for the general requirements of precautionary attachment. The same need for security cannot be treated as existing for the part of the claim that the pledge fully covers. Where it is concretely shown that the value of the pledge does not cover the debt, the uncovered part may be assessed separately. The pledge limit, current value, earlier ranks and outstanding balance must be documented. A guarantee (kefalet) is personal security; it does not automatically produce the same legal result as a pledge. [2: Art. 257; 5: §§17–24]

How is the exception for a claim not yet due proved?

İİK Article 257(2) provides two exceptional situations for a debt not yet due: the debtor has no specific place of residence, or the debtor hides or conceals property, prepares to flee, flees, or carries out fraudulent transactions harming the creditor's rights in order to escape its obligations. In this group, the special ground must be explained with concrete facts. Not every economic difficulty, every sales preparation or a mere change of address produces the same result. [2]

For example, an ordinary sale to unrelated persons and an apparent transfer to close persons which leaves the assets at the debtor's disposal cannot be assessed in the same way. The date, price, relationship between the parties and purpose of the transaction are examined together. If a precautionary attachment is imposed under this provision, the debt becomes due only as regards the debtor; that consequence does not automatically extend to guarantors and other obligors.

Is finality required for a claim based on a court judgment?

The decision of the Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation 12 dated 22 December 2025, E. 2025/8129, K. 2025/8357, addressed the divergence between regional courts of appeal on enforceable judgments for monetary claims. The Chamber accepted that, within the dispute examined, an enforceable judgment concerning a monetary claim is sufficient for a precautionary attachment, and that finality of the judgment and a separate danger of asset concealment are not required. The security exemption under İİK Article 259 for claims based on an enforceable judgment is also important. [6]

This decision does not mean that all judgments and all operative parts may be applied in the same way before they become final. The nature of the judgment, the claim item requested and special finality rules must be checked separately. A precautionary attachment, enforcement proceedings based on an enforceable judgment and the suspension of enforcement are different steps. Which of them is required in a file depends on the need for protection and the current stage of enforcement.

For details, see the section on precautionary attachment of ships and yachts.

How Is Prima Facie Proof Provided and Which Documents Should Be Prepared?

Prima facie proof does not mean an unsupported allegation

In interim protection, the court does not complete from the beginning the full proof review of the main action. Nor does it automatically accept the applicant's account as correct. Under HMK Article 390(3) and İİK Article 258, sufficient conviction must be formed on the basis of concrete documents. Reducing prima facie proof to an automatic numerical threshold such as "51 percent probability" is misleading. The reliability of the evidence, its mutual support and the alternative possibilities are all assessed. Ahmet Başözen's study on prima facie proof is also useful in showing that the concept should not be reduced to asserting a possibility without evidence. [1, 2, 10]

In the application file, a short chronology of events should come first, followed by the relevant document for each event. Rather than attaching hundreds of pages without explanation, the link between the relevant clause of the contract, the delivery record, the notice of maturity and the payment movement should be established. That an invoice has been issued and that goods or services have been properly delivered to the other party are separate questions.

Table 2 — Matching the claim, documents and counter-arguments

The integrity of digital records and personal data must be protected

For email or messaging records, the context of the communication, its date, the parties and, where possible, the original record should be preserved, rather than a single selected screenshot. How the document was obtained should be explainable, and methods that would create unlawfully obtained evidence must not be used. Personal and commercial information submitted to the court should be kept limited to the dispute. HMK Article 189(2) prohibits the assessment of unlawfully obtained evidence. [1]

Removing from the file a payment or delivery document in favor of the opposing party damages the credibility of the request. Disclosing the gaps at the outset allows it to be seen where the prima facie proof is strong and where it is contested. Posting security does not replace a missing item of evidence or the legal basis.

Before Which Court and When Should Application Be Made?

Subject-matter jurisdiction, territorial jurisdiction and representation must be checked separately

An interim injunction is requested, before an action is filed, from the court with subject-matter and territorial jurisdiction over the underlying dispute; after an action is filed, from the court hearing the main action. In the case of precautionary attachment, the jurisdictional connection under İİK Articles 258 and 50 is assessed together with the subject-matter rules of the relationship on which the claim is based. An attachment request in a pending case should be considered by the court in which that file is located. [1: Art. 390; 2: Arts. 50, 258]

Not every claim can be brought before "the civil court of first instance". A commercial dispute, a consumer transaction, an employment relationship or a special rule of jurisdiction may change the result. A jurisdiction agreement does not have the same effect for every party and every dispute. The application petition must identify the correct natural or legal person, the authority to represent, the address and the connection with the dispute. It is not enough to request attachment of a partner's assets for a company's debt merely by relying on the partnership relationship.

What does it mean that a decision is made without hearing the opposing party?

Where immediate protection is necessary under HMK Article 390(2), an injunction may be granted without hearing the opposing party. In a precautionary attachment the court is free to decide whether or not to hear the parties. The applicant must substantiate in particular the claim that prior notice would render the protection ineffective. The fact that the opposing party was not heard does not mean that the allegations have been accepted as definitive or that the right of defense has been removed; subsequent objection and appeal safeguards come into play. [1, 2]

There is no general guarantee that the application will be decided on the same day. The clarity of the file, the court's review and, where necessary, the submission of additional documents or security affect the timing. For this reason, preparation should cover not only sending the petition but also setting up a follow-up system to learn of and implement the decision.

Can an Injunction or Attachment Be Requested While Mediation Is Ongoing?

Urgent protection and the precondition of the main action differ

In a dispute subject to mediation as a condition precedent to litigation, temporary legal protection may be requested without waiting for the mediation process to be completed. However, the relevant mediation condition must be observed when the main action is filed. An application to a mediation office does not by itself produce an injunction or attachment order; a separate request must be made to the court. [3: Art. 18/A]

Article 18/A(16) of Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes provides that the periods for bringing an action under HMK Article 397(1) for pre-action injunctions and İİK Article 264(1) for pre-action attachments do not run from the application to the mediation office until the preparation of the final mediation record. A suspended period and a period that starts afresh are not the same. The time elapsed before the application, the date of the final record and the remaining period must be recorded separately.

This provision does not suspend all periods. The one-week period for requesting enforcement of an injunction, the ten-day period for requesting enforcement of a precautionary attachment, and objection periods are not automatically treated as suspended by this provision. Nor is it correct to include every subsequent step under İİK Article 264 in the same rule. This special consequence for mediation as a condition precedent to litigation should not automatically be carried over to every voluntary meeting.

Confidentiality of discussions must be separated from pre-existing evidence

Statements and proposals made during mediation solely for the purpose of settlement, and contracts, payment or delivery records that existed before the dispute, do not share the same character. Mediation confidentiality and limits on evidence must be observed. A document that existed beforehand does not lose its evidentiary character merely because it was used in mediation; however, an acceptance or offer submitted purely in settlement negotiations and then brought before the court is assessed separately. [3: Arts. 4–5]

How Are Security, Fees and Costs Assessed?

Is 15 percent security mandatory in every file?

The general provisions on interim injunctions and precautionary attachments contain no fixed 15 percent security rule applicable to all files. Security is intended to cover losses that the opposing party or a third party may suffer through unjustified protection. The scope of the measure requested, the probable loss and the characteristics of the file are important. A rate applied in a particular file should not be presented as a general statutory rate. The special 15 percent minimum in an action for negative declaratory judgment is a separate rule. [1: Art. 392; 2: Arts. 72, 259]

The applicant should not confine itself to asking for a "decision without security"; it should also state the provision and the document on which that request rests. If the opposing party contends that the security is insufficient, it must show the probable heads of loss, the effect on operations and the reasons for the correction it seeks. The amount of the security and the principal amount of the dispute serve different functions.

The conditions for a decision without security differ between the two institutions

Under HMK Article 392, where the request is based on an official document or other conclusive evidence, or where the circumstances and conditions so require, the court may decide with an express statement of reasons that no security is to be required. A party benefiting from legal aid need not provide security for an injunction. The file must make clear on which decision and within what scope this outcome rests. [1]

Under İİK Article 259, by contrast, no security is required where the claim is based on an enforceable judgment. Where the claim is based on a document of enforceable character, the court decides whether security is required. An ordinary contract, invoice or strong correspondence does not turn into an enforceable document merely because it is persuasive. Transferring the security exemption for injunctions directly to attachments may produce an erroneous result. [2]

A cost budget does not consist of a single item

Application fees, service, enforcement measures, custody, expert examination where needed, and attorney's fees should be kept separate. Security is, unlike these, a binding guarantee amount. Not every item arises in every file; the scope of the application and the manner of enforcement are decisive. Giving a single total fee without reviewing the current tariff and the file information is not sound practice.

The client should be told at the outset which payment is a cost and which is security, at what stage any additional expense may arise, and the conditions on which any refund depends. Expectations must not be created in the form of "security has been posted, so the decision is now final" or "if the case is won, all economic losses will be recovered in full".

How Is an Interim Injunction Enforced and Preserved?

The one-week period is for requesting enforcement

Under HMK Article 393(1), enforcement must be requested within one week of the decision being announced or served on the party seeking the injunction. The period does not run only from the day the decision was given. This starting point was amended by Law No. 7251; explanations based on the former text should not be used as though they were the current rule. If enforcement is not requested within the period, the injunction lapses automatically, even if the main action has been filed. [1, 11]

The step the law requires here is that enforcement be requested in time; completing enforcement with all institutional steps within one week is not the same thing. Konuralp's study also focuses on separating the application from actual enforcement and on determining the authority that carries it out. Nevertheless, the making of the request should not be treated as the end of the matter; whether the decision has actually been carried out must be monitored. [9: pp. 1310–1312]

Enforcement is requested from the enforcement office within the jurisdiction of the court that gave the decision, or from the office where the property or right subject to the injunction is located. The court may appoint the chief clerk in its decision. In a file where a notice must be sent to a register, it is not enough that the decision appears on UYAP; the enforcement request, the dispatch of the notice and its entry in the register must be documented. [1: Art. 393]

Two weeks and the duty of documentation for a pre-action injunction

If protection was granted before an action was filed, the main action must be brought within two weeks of the date enforcement was requested. Documentation that the action has been filed must be handed to the enforcing officer, placed in the file, and a receipt obtained in return. Merely filing the action leaves out the complementary step the law requires. The starting point is not the day the injunction was actually enforced or the date of service of the decision. The special stay rule on mediation must also be taken into account. [1: Art. 397; 3: Art. 18/A/16]

Table 3 — Basic periods for an interim injunction

The calculation of periods must also check proper service, the status of representation and the rules on public holidays. It should not be assumed that the judicial recess suspends all periods for these urgent matters and related time limits. HMK Article 103 lists interim legal protection among the matters that may be heard during the judicial recess. [1]

How Is a Precautionary Attachment Enforced and Completed?

The ten-day enforcement request and the seven-day completion period are separate

Under İİK Article 261, the creditor must request enforcement from the enforcement office within the jurisdiction of the court that gave the decision within ten days from the date of the decision. Here, unlike with an injunction, the starting point is the date of the decision. Waiting for the decision to be served may lead to a loss of time. If enforcement is not requested within the period, the precautionary attachment order lapses automatically. [2]

Where an attachment is carried out before a lawsuit or enforcement proceedings, İİK Article 264(1) applies. The creditor must, within seven days of being served with the record of the attachment, file an action or request enforcement proceedings; where the attachment was made in its absence, the record must be served on it. The criteria of presence and service here concern the creditor and must not be confused with the starting point of the debtor's objection period.

Enforcement of a precautionary attachment does not in every case require previously finalized enforcement proceedings. However, to preserve the temporary attachment, the step in the law, whether a proceeding or an action, must be completed within the period. Enforcing a precautionary attachment, requesting enforcement proceedings, and the sending of a payment order or an enforcement order are different steps. The document used differs depending on the type of proceedings: an enforcement order in proceedings based on an enforceable judgment must not be described with the same name as a payment order in proceedings not based on one.

If the enforcement proceedings are objected to, do not miss the new periods

If the creditor has chosen the enforcement route and the debtor has objected to the payment order, the creditor must, within seven days of the objection being served on it, request the lifting of the objection or file an action. If the request to lift the objection is rejected, an action must be filed within seven days of the pronouncement or service of the rejection decision. These short periods are important for preserving the precautionary attachment. The special seven-day period under İİK Article 264 must not be neglected in reliance on a general period found in another provision for the annulment of the objection. [2]

Where the attachment was made during the action or an action was filed under İİK Article 264(1), the enforcement request must be made within one month of the service on the creditor of the judgment on the main issue by the court. This provision specifies the completion step required by the law; it is not a general permission that removes the special finality rules. The current state of the action or the proceedings and the nature of the judgment are assessed together.

Table 4 — Sequence of steps and periods in a precautionary attachment

If the statutory completion periods are missed, the precautionary attachment may become ineffective. Withdrawal from the action or the enforcement proceedings, lapse of the enforcement proceedings, failure to renew within one month after the action has been removed from the docket, and losing the case are also assessed under İİK Article 264. The general period for renewal and the special period required to keep a temporary attachment in force are not the same. Once enforcement proceedings have become final or the objection has been removed, the conditions for converting the attachment into a final attachment must be checked separately. [2]

How Can the Opposing Party Respond to an Injunction or Attachment?

Objection, appeal and complaint against enforcement are different remedies

An injunction granted without hearing the opposing party is challenged under HMK Article 394; a precautionary attachment granted without hearing is challenged under İİK Article 265. The relationship between the one-week period set for injunctions, the seven-day period set for attachments and the service of the enforcement record or minutes is shown in the tables above. The petition must explain, with supporting documents, which condition was not met, the basis of any objection to jurisdiction, and the problem concerning security. The general statement "I do not accept the debt" does not replace all of the grounds for objection. [1, 2]

Where a request is refused, the regime of remedies is reviewed separately, as to a decision given in the presence of the opposing party and a decision made on objection against a judgment given in its absence. Under the special provisions on HMK Articles 341 and 345, the period for appeal is, as a rule, two weeks from proper service. Under the relevant temporary protection provisions, the review by the regional court of appeal is a priority and its decision is final. It should not be assumed that every interim ruling and every application to lift a measure is subject to the same remedy. [1: Arts. 341, 345, 391, 394; 2: Arts. 258, 265]

Where the enforcement office has acted unlawfully in carrying out a precautionary attachment, a complaint lies to the enforcement court to which the executing office is attached. This route is different from an objection to the attachment order by the court. The period and the basis of the application must be examined separately. Unless otherwise decided, an objection to an injunction does not stop its enforcement; nor does an application for a remedy by itself remove the protection. [1: Art. 394; 2: Arts. 261, 265]

How are a third party's property and immunity from attachment protected?

A third party whose interests are manifestly infringed by the measure may object to its conditions and to the security within one week of learning of it. In the case of a precautionary attachment, a third party whose interests are infringed is given a seven-day objection period from learning of it. These do not make redundant the ownership claim (istihkak) route by a person asserting that the property belongs to it, or other applications concerning enforcement proceedings. The appropriate route is chosen according to the nature of the right asserted. [1: Art. 394/3; 2: Art. 265]

Property that does not belong to the debtor cannot be treated as indisputably the debtor's merely because it is at the same address. Invoices, registry entries, contracts and possession records are assessed together. Property and income that are not attachable, or that are attachable only in part, and enforcement exceeding the debt are also subject to separate review. A precautionary attachment order does not confer unlimited power of seizure that removes these protections. [2: Arts. 79–99, 261]

Lifting by security and changed circumstances

Under HMK Article 395, the injunction may be modified or lifted by counter-security; under Article 396, it may be challenged on the basis that the circumstances have changed. For example, the removal of the risk of transfer, a change in the condition of the protected property, or the sufficiency of a more limited measure may be used as grounds. These are not a way of repeating an initial objection that was not raised in time, with no conditions required. [1]

Under İİK Article 266, the debtor may seek the lifting of a precautionary attachment by showing the security the law accepts. Once enforcement proceedings have begun, the competent authority for this is the enforcement court; it must not be confused with the enforcement office. Retaining property with the debtor against a guarantee and lifting the attachment are different consequences. Particularly for protections based on special legislation, it should not be assumed that the general lifting route applies in exactly the same way. [2: Arts. 263, 266]

How Long Does Temporary Protection Last, and Does It Guarantee Collection?

The necessity of a prolonged injunction should be reassessed

Under HMK Article 397(2), unless otherwise stated, the injunction continues until the final decision becomes final. This rule does not mean that every injunction that was appropriate at the outset may be maintained for years in the same scope and without reasons. The stage of the file, the continuing need for protection, the value of the property and the burden placed on the opposing party should be reassessed. [1]

In its decision of 2 October 2025, Application No. 2020/34381, in the case of Makbule Duran and others, the Constitutional Court examined from the standpoint of the right to property the continuation, for more than eighteen years, of a measure over bank accounts and real estate. The Court found a problem of proportionality as regards the scope and duration of the measure and reached a finding of violation. The decision cannot be read as meaning that "a measure of up to eighteen years is permissible"; it shows the importance of explaining the duration and scope by concrete necessity. [8: §§6–10]

An attachment does not mean you will be paid before all other creditors

A precautionary attachment does not transfer the debtor's property to the creditor, and it does not directly produce payment. Whether the property in fact belongs to the debtor, its economic value, earlier pledges and attachments, the conditions for joining an attachment, and the outcome of the sale all affect collection. The joinder regime under İİK Article 268 is not an unconditional priority independent of the conditions in Article 100. [2]

The decision of the Civil Chamber 6 of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 6. Hukuk Dairesi) dated 29 December 2022, E. 2021/5414, K. 2022/6165, raises the problem of treating a record of an injunction as a record of attachment in the context of an action to set aside a disposition and a distribution schedule. The procedural and joinder assessment in that decision depends on the features of the file; the basic lesson to be drawn from it is that a note of an injunction does not by itself create an order of priority of attachment. [7]

For this reason, the client should not be told merely that "property has been attached". It should be explained which property or right the attachment applies to, what prior encumbrances exist, what recovery is likely and what the next step in the distribution process is. Sending a letter to a bank account and the presence of money in the account that can be collected are not the same outcome.

What Are the Limits of the General Rules in Special Situations?

Suspension of enforcement in an action for negative declaratory judgment

İİK Article 72 contains a special protective regime for a person asserting that it does not owe the debt. In an action for negative declaratory judgment brought before enforcement proceedings, enforcement may, on request and against security of not less than 15 percent of the claim, be suspended. Where the action is brought after enforcement proceedings have begun, the general rule of the same provision means that enforcement cannot be suspended by an injunction; it may be requested that the money deposited with the enforcement office not be paid to the creditor, against security of at least 15 percent. The existence of security does not by itself produce an automatic decision. [2]

An important special exception is found in Article 18/A(16) of Law No. 6325: where, after an application to a mediation office, enforcement proceedings are commenced against the applicant in respect of the same dispute, and an action for negative declaratory judgment is brought and requested within two weeks of the final record, İİK Article 72(2) applies. The generalization that "in no circumstances can suspension be requested once enforcement has begun" therefore overlooks this exception. The dates of the application, the enforcement proceedings and the final record must be examined together. [3]

Preservation of evidence and annulment of a disposition are not the same protection

Preservation of evidence is directed at protecting evidence that may disappear or become more difficult to obtain later. An inspection of a damaged building does not mean that an attachment is imposed on the debtor's assets. An injunction or attachment and preservation of evidence may both be necessary in the same dispute; however, the requirements, outcome and procedural arrangement of each request must be set up separately. [1: Art. 400 et seq.]

In an action to annul a disposition, İİK Article 281(2) contains a special provision on precautionary attachment of the property subject to annulment. The parties, the security and circumstances such as the property having already been transferred may be separated from the general attachment of claims. The general explanations of Article 257 do not replace all the details of this special provision. If there are composition or bankruptcy proceedings, the protections and enforcement restrictions that may apply must also be assessed according to the stage of the file. [2]

Foreign elements and arbitration must be examined separately

If the debtor's property or evidence is in a foreign country, it should not be assumed that a decision obtained from a Turkish court will be directly enforceable there. International jurisdiction, the effect of a foreign decision, security and the rules of the country of enforcement require separate examination. Where the contract contains an arbitration clause, the temporary protection powers of the court and of the arbitrators, and the enforcement of any decision, must be governed by their own rules. The internal Turkish procedure in this guide should not be copied uncritically into a cross-border file. For details, see our article on collection of a monetary claim in Türkiye by a foreign creditor. For a broader framework, the article Enforcement in Türkiye of Foreign Court Money Judgments may be read.

Can Compensation Be Claimed for an Unjustified Injunction or Attachment?

Loss and causation must be shown separately

HMK Article 399 governs compensation for losses arising from an unjustified injunction, in circumstances such as where it becomes clear that the party seeking the injunction was unjustified at the date of the request, or where the decision lapses or is lifted on objection. İİK Article 259 deals with the losses suffered by the debtor and by third parties as a result of an unjustified precautionary attachment. In these provisions, the applicant's liability risk should not be regarded as a cost limited to the amount of security it posted. [1, 2]

Lifting a decision does not in every case automatically produce a specific amount of compensation. The loss claimed must be shown to have occurred and to be connected with the protective measure. A claim concerning financing costs, a fall in the value of the property or loss of business activity is substantiated by bank records, contracts, accounting documents and, where necessary, technical examination. The loss that would have arisen in any event must be distinguished from the additional loss caused by the injunction or attachment.

Where the applicant continues the step after the whole debt has been paid, or requests protection well beyond the necessary limit, the dispute may be aggravated. The opposing party should also consider reasonable steps to prevent the loss from increasing. Temporary protection is not a tool to be used disproportionately to exert pressure in negotiation.

Do not confuse the one-month refund of security with the limitation period for compensation

HMK Article 392(2) provides for the refund of security if no action for compensation is brought within one month of the final judgment on the merits becoming final or the injunction being lifted. HMK Article 399(3) provides, for the compensation action, a one-year statute of limitations from the date the judgment becomes final or the injunction is lifted. One month is not the period after which the right to compensation ends in all cases; it is significant separately for keeping the security on the file. [1]

The one-year period under HMK Article 399 should not be copied directly for an unjustified precautionary attachment. For the general statute of limitations on compensation, the arrangement under Article 72 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (TBK) — two years from the date the loss and the liable person become known, and in any event ten years from the act — is assessed together with the nature of the continuing process, the date of knowledge and the special provisions that may apply. The longer period for acts that are subject to criminal penalty is also reserved. The start date should not be automatically taken as the day the attachment order was given. [2: Art. 259; 4: Art. 72]

How Should the Application File and Client Communication Be Organized?

The check to complete before drafting the petition

An application becomes reviewable when the answers to the following questions can be seen in the same file:

1. Result sought: Which right or claim will be protected; is an injunction, an attachment or a special protection sought?
2. Parties and representation: Is the petition directed at the right person; are the representation document and the authority to apply in order?
3. Court: Have subject-matter jurisdiction, territorial jurisdiction under the substantive relationship and any pending action been checked?
4. Chain of documents: Which document explains the right, the amount, the maturity, the pledge and, where necessary, the special danger?
5. Counter-defense: Have payment, defect, set-off, third-party rights or the possibility of a milder measure been assessed?
6. Scope requested: Are the property, share, amount and prohibited act clear; is there a justification for proportionality?
7. Financial preparation: Have security, fees and enforcement costs been shown separately?
8. Timeline: Have the dates of the decision, its announcement, service, request for enforcement, enforcement and the final record been recorded separately?
9. Proof of enforcement: How will it be verified that the enforcement or register step has taken place?
10. Continuation and exit: Who will follow the main action or proceedings, the objection, the lifting and the refund of security?

This list does not recommend the same petition for every file. For example, adding proof of asset concealment that is not required for a matured claim is wrong, as is failing to explain the special ground in a claim that is not yet due. The legal nature of the file shows which part of the checklist is decisive.

Explain the step taken and the remaining risk, not just the decision

For a person worried that their property will change hands or that their claim cannot be collected, legal terms alone are not enough. What was requested, what the court decided, which part of the decision has been enforced, and what has not yet happened should be clearly explained. This approach also applies when protection has been applied to the other party's accounts or property; the possibility of objection and the effects on daily life must be explained in plain terms.

The file record should keep together the step, the date, the document, the next step and the responsible person. The principle "write what you do, do what you wrote, record that you did it" becomes, here, a concrete management of periods. If an application has been made, keep the receipt; if an attachment has been carried out, keep the record; if a notice has been sent to a register, keep the result; if an action has been filed, keep the record that the complementary filing was submitted to the file.

Do not limit the client's updates to positive developments. When there is no decision, when enforcement has not been completed, or when there is no money in the account, the position and the next step must still be reported. What reduces anxiety is not an unfounded assurance but regular communication explaining what is known and what is expected. No promise of outcome can replace the work and the record-keeping.

Conclusion

Interim injunctions and precautionary attachments serve to protect a right while proceedings are pending, but they are not subject to the same requirements and the same periods. The distinction between protecting the right in dispute and securing a monetary claim is the starting point of any application. Correct classification gains meaning together with sufficient documents, a proportionate request and the opposing party's opportunities for defense.

The work does not end once protective relief has been granted. The request for enforcement, verification of actual enforcement, the main action or proceedings, and any objection must each be followed separately where needed. That the injunction period runs from announcement or service, while the period for the attachment runs from the date of the decision, already shows why a single general timeline is not sufficient.

The aim is not to halt the entire economic life of the other party or to promise collection. The aim is to establish a legally defensible protection on time, maintain it to the extent necessary, and lift it when its conditions have ceased to exist. What protects the right is not only the existence of the decision but its enforcement in the correct scope and within the correct time.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I request an interim injunction or precautionary attachment before filing a lawsuit?

Yes; where the statutory conditions are met, an application can be made before the action. However, there are specific periods for enforcing the decision and then for the main action or proceedings. For an injunction, documentation to the enforcing officer that the main action has been filed is also required. See the sections on enforcement of an injunction and completion of an attachment.

Can I have an injunction placed on a debtor's real estate for a monetary claim?

As a rule, a precautionary attachment is considered to secure the collection of a monetary claim. An injunction may come into consideration where ownership of the real estate is directly the subject of the dispute. Special statutory provisions are reserved. The difference between the two institutions is decisive.

If the debtor is not concealing assets, can a precautionary attachment not be obtained?

For a matured monetary claim not secured by a pledge, proof of asset concealment is not a general requirement. The claim and the other conditions must be shown prima facie. For a claim not yet due, the special grounds provided by law are required. See the section on conditions for a precautionary attachment.

Is an invoice alone sufficient for a precautionary attachment?

It cannot be said that it is sufficient in every file. The relationship on which the invoice is based, delivery or performance of services, maturity, payment and counter-objections are examined together. The connection established through contract and delivery documents is important. The section Prima facie proof explains document preparation.

Is security 15 percent in all files?

No. There is no fixed 15 percent rule for general injunctions and attachments. The special minimum in an action for negative declaratory judgment is assessed separately. The conditions for an attachment based on an enforceable judgment and for a decision without security in an injunction also differ. See the section on security and costs.

Does the court's decision complete the bank or land registry transaction?

No. The enforcement request, the relevant enforcement or registry step, and the record that the step has been carried out must be followed. The existence of a decision in the file does not by itself show that an attachment has been recorded against an account or an injunction has been registered in the register. The record-keeping in the section Application file and communication helps follow this distinction.

Do all periods stop when an application is made to mediation?

No. The suspension under Article 18/A(16) of Law No. 6325 applies to the periods for bringing an action specified there. The periods for requesting enforcement of an injunction, requesting enforcement of an attachment and objections do not stop automatically. See the section Interim injunction and mediation.

Does enforcement stop immediately when an objection to an injunction or attachment is made?

It should not be assumed that it does. Unless a contrary decision is made, an objection to an injunction does not stop its enforcement; an application for a legal remedy alone does not produce the effect of lifting the protection. The route of application is chosen according to the form in which the decision was given and the ground relied on. See the section on objections and remedies.

Can the security given for an injunction or attachment be increased or changed later?

Depending on the specific circumstances, the security may be objected to, the protection may be changed, or it may be lifted against counter-security. The authority that decides, and the route to follow, are not the same. Once enforcement proceedings have begun, a request for lifting under İİK Article 266 is directed to the enforcement court. See the section on ways of responding.

Does a precautionary attachment mean the claim will definitely be collected?

No. The value of the property, earlier pledges and attachments, third-party rights, the transition to a final attachment and the result of the sale are all important. An attachment does not transfer ownership to the creditor and does not provide a right to payment ahead of every other creditor. See the section on duration and collection security.

After enforcement proceedings have begun, can enforcement be suspended through an action for negative declaratory judgment?

The general rule under İİK Article 72 is that, in an action brought after enforcement proceedings have begun, enforcement is not suspended by an injunction; the prevention of payment of money is a separate possibility. However, the special position after mediation under Article 18/A(16) of Law No. 6325 must be assessed separately. The section on the negative declaratory action distinction explains why the dates matter.

Is the right to compensation entirely lost one month after an injunction is lifted?

No. The one month under HMK Article 392 relates to the refund of security. The compensation limitation period under HMK Article 399 is separately set at one year. The period regime for an unjustified precautionary attachment is also not identical to these. See the section on compensation and periods.

Does the granting of an injunction or attachment mean I have won the case?

No. Temporary protection is assessed on prima facie proof; it does not replace the determination of the underlying dispute on the full body of evidence. Counter-evidence, objection and the outcome of the proceedings may alter the protection. The section on the meaning of prima facie proof explains this difference.

Does obtaining a preservation of evidence prevent the sale or transfer of the property?

Not by itself. Preservation of evidence protects proof; a separate application for temporary protection, with its conditions met, is needed to prevent the sale or transfer of the property. See the section Special situations and preservation of evidence.

Sources and legal bases

1. Law No. 6100 on Civil Procedure (Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu, HMK), in particular Arts. 33, 93, 103, 189, 341, 345, 389–406. Ministry of Justice legislation record; accessible text of the law.
2. Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004 (İcra ve İflâs Kanunu, İİK), in particular Arts. 50, 72, 79–100, 257–268 and 281(2). Ministry of Justice legislation record; text of Arts. 257–268; text of Art. 72.
3. Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes (Hukuk Uyuşmazlıklarında Arabuluculuk Kanunu), Arts. 4–5, 18/A, in particular paras. 15–16. Ministry of Justice, text of the law.
4. Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (Türk Borçlar Kanunu, TBK), Art. 72. Ministry of Justice legislation record.
5. Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu), 20 May 2021, E. 2017/1796, K. 2021/607; in particular §§17–24 and 25–54. Decision text.
6. Civil Chamber 12 of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 12. Hukuk Dairesi), 22 December 2025, E. 2025/8129, K. 2025/8357; resolution of the divergence between regional courts of appeal on precautionary attachment under an enforceable judgment for a monetary claim. Decision text.
7. Civil Chamber 6 of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 6. Hukuk Dairesi), 29 December 2022, E. 2021/5414, K. 2022/6165; injunction, precautionary attachment and joinder in attachment. Decision text.
8. Constitutional Court (Anayasa Mahkemesi), Makbule Duran and others, Application No. 2020/34381, 2 October 2025; in particular §§6–10. Decision text.
9. Konuralp, Cengiz Serhat, "Enforcement of an Interim Injunction Decision" (İhtiyati Tedbir Kararının Uygulanması), Necmettin Erbakan University Faculty of Law Journal (Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi), 8(3), 2025, pp. 1303–1326; in particular pp. 1310–1312. Article record; full text.
10. Başözen, Ahmet, "The Concepts of 'Prima Facie Proof' and 'Probability' in Interim Injunctions in Light of Recent Court of Cassation Decisions" (Güncel Yargıtay Kararları Işığında İhtiyati Tedbirlerde "Yaklaşık İspat" ve "İhtimal" Kavramı), Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Law Journal (Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi), 16, Special Issue, 2014, pp. 653–694, published 2015. Article record; full text.
11. Law No. 7251 Amending the Civil Procedure Law and Certain Other Laws (7251 sayılı Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu ile Bazı Kanunlarda Değişiklik Yapılması Hakkında Kanun), 22 July 2020, in particular Arts. 40–42 and 50. Grand National Assembly of Türkiye, text of the law.