Opening a will does not mean that a house or other property left under it is delivered directly. First, the will is opened and notified before the civil court of peace (sulh hukuk mahkemesi); then it is determined whether the disposition is the appointment of an heir or the bequest of a specific asset. The routes for application and lawsuit differ for an appointed heir and for a legatee. If registration in the land registry or delivery is sought, the chosen route must be capable of producing that result.
This article covers the post-death implementation of wills drawn up under Turkish law. For preparing and amending a will, see the guide on drafting a will. Foreign wills and foreign court decisions used in Türkiye are assessed separately in terms of the applicable law, the form of the document, and recognition and enforcement. For practical examples, see also the article on applying a foreign will in Türkiye.
What is the first step when a will is found?
After the testator’s death, a will that is found must be delivered to the judge of peace (sulh hâkimi) immediately, even if it is believed to be invalid. This duty does not rest only with heirs. An official who drew up or kept the will, a person who held it at the testator’s request, a person who found it among belongings, and anyone else who came into possession of it in another way must also deliver it once they learn of the death. Liability for damage caused by failure to deliver may arise. [TMK Art. 595, Source 1]
A torn document, a correction on it, an old date, or the fact that a later will has been made are not grounds for withholding delivery. If there is more than one text, all of them are reported. Which one is valid, or which earlier disposition it revokes, is not decided by the unilateral choice of the person holding the documents.
The original of the document, its place and date of keeping, its envelope and any annexes must be preserved. Writing notes on it, adding a date or rearranging the pages makes proof more difficult. If the original cannot be found, copies, notarial records and other registers are submitted to the court; the mere presence or absence of a photocopy does not automatically lead to a conclusion on validity. If forgery or destruction is alleged, this must be proven separately.
How is a will opened and notified?
Competent court and the one-month opening period
A will is opened before the civil court of peace at the testator’s last place of residence, within one month from its delivery, and is read to the interested persons. The one-month period is not a period during which an heir may keep the will after death; the duty to deliver is immediate. The opening is carried out without an examination of the substantive validity of the document. The same procedure applies to wills that come to light later. [TMK Art. 595–596, Source 1]
Known heirs and other interested persons may be summoned to attend if they wish. The failure of a person who was duly summoned to appear at the hearing does not by itself prevent the opening. On the other hand, an incomplete search for heirs or defective notification may require the file to be completed. At the hearing, the content of the text and any objections are recorded; the signatures of the heirs do not create a new will.
Why an opening decision is not a validity decision
The purpose of opening is to make the last will known and to start the proceedings related to it. At this stage the judge of peace does not resolve every claim of capacity, form, reserved share or defect of consent as if it were a contested action. The statement “the court opened the will, so it can no longer be challenged” is therefore wrong. Claims for annulment and reduction are brought within their own conditions and time limits.
Persons with rights in the estate are served with a certified copy of the parts that concern them. Where the address of a person is unknown, service by public notice is provided for. The notification record, the opening minutes and the decision should be kept together. The date on which a right is learned of and the date on which the decision becomes final are not always the same. [TMK Art. 597–598, Source 1]
The difference between an appointed heir and a legatee
| Disposition | Right acquired | Basic route in practice |
|---|---|---|
| Appointment of an heir to the whole estate or to a share of it | The estate is acquired upon death, as a whole or as a share | Certificate of appointed heirship and succession based on it; any separate dispute over rights is resolved separately |
| Bequest of a specific house, plot, money or item | As a rule, a personal claim against the person bound by the bequest arises | Voluntary performance; failing that, an action for delivery of the property or for transfer of the right |
| Bequest of a usufruct or periodic performance | A right of use or a periodic claim, depending on the scope of the disposition | Performance under the rules of property law and the law of obligations for the relevant assets and debts |
The word “bequest” in the heading of a disposition is not sufficient; the whole text is interpreted. Hypothetical example: “I appoint my brother as heir to half of my estate” and “I leave the house in this independent unit to my brother” do not produce the same result. In the first, a share of the estate is at issue; in the second, a claim concerning a specific property. The same text may both appoint a person as heir and separately leave a specific asset to that person. [TMK Art. 516–519, 599–601, Source 1]
An appointed heir, like a statutory heir, is liable for the debts of the estate. Being merely a legatee, however, does not make a person a universal successor to the same extent. A legacy claim, on the other hand, is not independent of the priority of estate creditors or of the limits of the reserved share. That a specific asset from the estate is bequeathed does not mean that it will always be delivered free of debts.
Is an enforcement action needed for every will?
No. Because an appointed heir acquires the estate upon death, such a person may not need a separate enforcement action merely to establish that status and to effect the succession. Obtaining a certificate of appointed heirship from the civil court of peace under Article 598 of the Turkish Civil Code (TMK) may form the basis of the necessary land registry steps. On the other hand, where a third person is recorded in the land registry, the scope of the disposition is disputed, or there is an obstacle to delivery, a separate claim suited to those circumstances is assessed.
In its decision dated December 19, 2024, E.2024/895, K.2024/5850, the 7th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 7. HD) held that a claimant who had been appointed sole heir by a later will had no legal interest in bringing an enforcement action. The acceptance of an action brought when registration was possible with a certificate of appointed heirship was quashed. The decision does not show that all land registry disputes can be resolved without documents; it shows that the type of disposition and the need for an action must first be correctly identified. [Source 4]
Why should “enforcement” and a request for registration or delivery be separated?
In practice, the word tenfiz is sometimes used to mean establishing that a will has not been challenged or that challenges have remained without result, and sometimes to mean the actual performance of the will. Mehmet Akçaal’s study addresses this distinction between establishment and performance, and the fact that the concept is not regulated in law as an independent action name. This view helps explain why one uniform type of claim cannot be set up for every file. [Source 5, pp. 374–396]
If ownership of an immovable is sought, the current land registry record, the parcel and independent unit, the share to be cancelled and the person in whose name registration is to be made must be clearly identified. For a vehicle or item, distinguishing details and delivery must be stated; for money, the amount or the method of calculation and the payment request must be set out. The elements needed for execution should not be left unclear by relying only on the phrase “enforcement of the will.” If the content of an opened will is uncertain, the article on interpretation of a will may be consulted.
Against whom and in which court is the action brought?
The legatee’s claim is directed to the executor of the will, if there is one; otherwise to the statutory or appointed heirs. Renunciation of the inheritance, the later death of heirs, the administration of the estate, or the transfer of the property to a third person may affect the list of parties. Where cancellation of title is sought, the position of the registered owner is also examined. Suing only the sibling with whom the dispute has arisen may not be sufficient. [TMK Art. 600, Source 1]
Contested claims for performance, registration and delivery fall within the general jurisdiction of the civil court of first instance (asliye hukuk mahkemesi). Opening and certificates of appointed heirship are separate from this. On venue, the testator’s last place of residence matters, and, for claims against heirs while the estate has not yet been divided, Article 11 of the Law No. 6100 on Civil Procedure (HMK) is significant. A registration claim based on a ground of enforcement should not automatically be filed where the immovable is located merely because it concerns real property. After division, where the dispute concerns an independent real right or a third person, HMK Art. 12 and the nature of the claim are assessed separately. [Source 2; Source 5, p. 389]
There is no general mandatory mediation requirement for opening or challenging a will. However, where the same file also involves division of the estate, partition, rent or another relationship, the procedural condition for each claim is assessed separately. The fact that a dispute arises from the estate does not by itself make all claims subject to mediation or exempt from it. The application of wills containing conditions or burdens is explained in the article on conditions and burdens in a will.
Time limits: what do one month, one year and ten years mean?
| Procedure or right | Period and starting point | Point to watch |
|---|---|---|
| Delivery of a will that has been found | Immediately upon learning of the death | Does not give a right to wait one month |
| Court opening procedure | One month from delivery | A court processing period |
| Objection relevant to the certificate of appointed heirship or of legatee status | One month from notice of the disposition to the person concerned | Not a general period that removes the right to bring an annulment action |
| Legacy claim | From learning of the bequest; if the debt becomes due later, ten years from that date | The prescription period under TMK Art. 602 |
| Annulment of the will | One year from the disposition, the ground for annulment and knowledge of the right holder; additionally ten years from opening against a bona fide defendant and twenty years against a mala fide defendant | Preclusive periods; the plea of invalidity is reserved |
| Reduction (tenkis) | One year from learning of the infringement of the reserved share; ten years from the opening of the will | The plea of reduction may be raised at any time |
A legacy claim becomes due, unless the disposition provides otherwise, when the bound person accepts the estate or the right to disclaim it lapses; in other words, performance can then be demanded. It is not correct to use only the date of death or only the date of opening for the one-year period of an annulment action. The opening file, notifications, actual knowledge, the later due date and pending lawsuits must be considered together. [TMK Art. 559, 571, 598, 600, 602, Source 1]
Interruption of prescription and preservation of a preclusive period are not the same thing. It should not be assumed that all litigation periods stop merely because a formal notice was sent. The effect of lawsuits and enforcement proceedings, acknowledgment of the debt and, where relevant, the time spent in mediation are calculated under their own provisions. Because the outcome of annulment and reduction files may affect a performance action, a question of suspension may arise; this possibility is not in itself a reason to wait and let the time run out.
Land registry entry, delivery of property and interim protection
For registration purposes, a certificate of appointed heirship and a legatee’s document cannot be used in place of one another. The Land Registry Regulation (Tapu Sicili Tüzüğü), Art. 20, separately governs the transaction based on a certificate of appointed heirship and the legatee’s request. In a legatee’s application, the enforcement judgment that identifies the immovable and contains the registration order is required; where that order is absent, the enforcement judgment together with the judge’s letter for registration and a certified copy of the will is required. Where a legatee applies together with statutory and appointed heirs, a separate route is provided based on the decision opening and reading the will and a certified copy of the will. The specific document set is evaluated by the land registry directorate. [Source 3]
Where a court decision is relied on, its finality and enforcement conditions are checked. Decisions concerning rights in an immovable cannot be carried out before they become final. Enforcement of a monetary or delivery order is considered according to the nature of the decision. Completing the transfer in the land registry does not mean that a person actually using the property will leave it voluntarily; a delivery judgment and, where necessary, enforcement proceedings based on it are required. [HMK Art. 350, 367; İİK Art. 24–26, Sources 2 and 6]
If there is a danger that the property will be transferred, lost or significantly diminished in value, an interim injunction may be requested with supporting evidence. For an injunction, the approximate proof of the right and of the danger, proportionality and, where necessary, security are assessed. An entry of an injunction in the land registry is not an automatic result of every lawsuit; a request and a court order are required. Measures that may be obtained from the judge of peace to protect the estate may also be considered separately. Where a will establishes a foundation, the registration process is addressed separately in the article on establishing a foundation by will.
Application file, costs and post-decision checks
When preparing an application, the following documents should be reviewed together:
- Death and population registry records, existing certificates of inheritance and the current list of heirs.
- The original or certified copy of the will, any later wills and any inheritance contract.
- The opening file, hearing minutes, notifications and the record of finality.
- Current land registry, vehicle, bank or item records; links between old and new parcels.
- The request for performance, the other party’s response, and delivery or payment documents.
- Information on actions for cancellation, reduction, rejection, matrimonial property or ownership.
The type of fee cannot be determined from the name of the file alone; a claim for a determination and a claim concerning the ownership or delivery of an immovable, or a monetary claim, may have different financial consequences. Notification, expert witness, site inspection, translation, land registry and enforcement costs are separate items. A single fixed “enforcement cost” does not apply to all files.
Against a final decision, the general period for appeal (istinaf) is two weeks from notification; the type of decision and the conditions for legal remedies are checked separately. The availability of an appeal on points of law (temyiz) also depends on the nature of the decision and the relevant monetary thresholds. After judgment, registration, delivery, payment, the lifting of any injunction and the recovery of costs must all be completed. For documents from abroad, translation, apostille or certification, and the effect of a foreign decision, are examined separately; these procedures are not the same as opening a Turkish will.
Conclusion
In applying a will, the first question is not “shall we bring an enforcement action?” but “which right has been acquired by which disposition, and which step is missing?” Once the opening and notification file is complete, an appointed heirship, a claim to a specific asset, registration and delivery are separated from one another. Time limits are calculated according to that distinction, and the claim is framed clearly enough to secure actual implementation of the decision.
For the related aspects, see our articles on the executor of the will and appointing substitute heirs and accruing heirs, and our page on inheritance law and inheritance proceedings.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the house pass directly to me when the will is opened?
Not in every case. Being appointed as an heir and being left a specific house are different things. The route of succession based on the document, or of performance and registration, is determined according to the type of disposition.
Must a will made before a notary also be opened in court?
Yes. An official instrument does not remove the opening and notification procedures that follow death. The civil court of peace is competent in the opening process.
Do I lose my inheritance right if I do not attend the opening hearing?
Merely not attending does not remove the inheritance right. However, periods linked to notification and to learning of the will may run. Each right in the time limits table must be assessed separately.
Does missing the one-month objection period end the annulment action?
No. The objection under TMK Art. 598 and the annulment action under TMK Art. 559 are different. The annulment action’s own preclusive periods are checked separately.
If I am appointed heir to the whole estate, is enforcement necessary?
Usually a certificate of appointed heirship is sufficient for the status and for succession based on it. If there is a separate dispute over ownership or delivery, the appropriate action is assessed separately; the need for enforcement therefore varies from file to file.
What happens if the bequeathed property has been sold to someone else?
What matters is whether the sale took place during the testator’s lifetime or after death, the content of the disposition, the position of the third person and the registry record. Not every sale results directly in the cancellation of title. Protection and performance options are addressed in the section on title and delivery, using the distinctions explained there.
How many years is the time limit for claiming a legacy?
The period under TMK Art. 602 is a ten-year prescription period. The starting point is learning of the gift; if the debt becomes due later, it is the due date. The date of death is not treated as the starting point in every case.
Does filing an annulment action stop the sale of the property?
Not by itself. An interim injunction, supported by concrete danger and evidence, must be requested, and the court must decide after evaluating the conditions.
Does a foreign court’s will decision require the same procedure?
No. Depending on the type of document, the applicable law and the effect sought for the foreign decision in Türkiye, a separate assessment is made. An apostille alone does not ensure that every decision can be enforced in Türkiye.
Sources and legal bases
- Turkish Civil Code No. 4721 (Türk Medenî Kanunu), in particular Art. 516–519, 550–556, 559, 571, 576, 595–604.
- Law No. 6100 on Civil Procedure (Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu), Art. 2, 4, 11–12, 114, 165, 345, 350, 367, 382, 389 and following.
- Land Registry Regulation (Tapu Sicili Tüzüğü), Art. 20; distinction between documents for succession and transfer on a will. Consolidated text, accessed October 13, 2026.
- 7th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi), December 19, 2024, E.2024/895, K.2024/5850, decision text as accessed; legal interest of an appointed heir in an enforcement request.
- Mehmet Akçaal, “Vasiyetnamenin Tenfizi Kavramı ve Vasiyetnamenin Tenfizi Davası”, NEÜHFD, 2023, 6(1), pp. 374–396, DOI: 10.51120/NEUHFD.2023.84.
- Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004 (İcra ve İflas Kanunu), Art. 24–26; Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes (Hukuk Uyuşmazlıklarında Arabuluculuk Kanunu), Art. 18/A–18/B.