When diverting assets is suspected, the first task is not to seek a general ban over all assets but to determine which transaction endangers which right. Protection before the transfer, adding the transfer to the liquidation calculation and an action against a third party form different routes.
How is the danger of transfer made specific?
An advertisement for sale, a land registry record with history, a recent share transfer, an unusual money movement or correspondence showing preparation for a transfer may be examined. The injunction requested should be proportionate to the possible claim and the value of the asset. Blocking all of a company’s accounts merely because a spouse is a shareholder is not the same as a measure directed at the spouse’s own share. [1, 3]
Which route is chosen if the transfer has taken place?
| Event | Priority examination |
|---|---|
| Genuine sale, price present in the account | The sale price or the value that replaces it |
| Specific gratuitous transfer | Adding to the calculation under Article 229 |
| Transfer made with the intent to reduce the claim | Intent, period, transaction and economic result |
| The apparent sale is not genuine | Simulation and the appropriate type of claim |
| Insufficiency of the spouse’s assets | The conditions of Article 241 and the special time limits |
The addition under Article 229 of the Turkish Civil Code does not always bring the title deed back. An action under Article 241 also does not make every transferee liable without limit; the limit of the gratuitous transfer and the shortfall in collection is important. The one-year and five-year time limits for bringing an action (hak düşürücü süre) must not be confused with the general ten-year statute of limitations.
What should be done after an injunction decision?
It should be monitored whether the decision has been implemented in the relevant registry or institution. For injunctions obtained before the action, there are time limits for the follow-up action and for enforcement. The continuation of the injunction, the narrowing of its scope, security or its lifting are also subject to judicial review. Obtaining the first decision does not end the protection part of the file.
Which distinctions matter for the defense?
A genuine debt payment, an ordinary commercial transaction and a family expense are distinguished from a transaction that has the purpose of reducing the claim. A sale to a close person does not by itself prove all the allegations; but it may require a detailed examination of the price and the terms of the transaction. For the plaintiff and the defendant, the same money movement must not be entered into the calculation twice.
How are an interim injunction and protection of assets requested?
Which protective instrument serves which purpose?
| Instrument | Direct purpose | Basic condition | Common mistake |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interim injunction under the Code of Civil Procedure | Preserving the existing situation over the right or asset in dispute | Prima facie proof, danger in delay, proportionality and, where necessary, security | Requesting, without reasons, a “ban on transfer” over all of the debtor’s assets for a monetary claim |
| Precautionary attachment under the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law | Securing the future collection of a monetary claim | The maturity/special conditions in Article 257 and following of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law | Thinking an injunction and an attachment are the same institution; skipping security and the follow-up steps |
| Family residence protection under Article 194 of the Turkish Civil Code | Protecting the right to the residence while the marriage continues | The character of a family residence and the issue of explicit consent | Seeing it as the same action and the same result as the participation claim |
| Value to be added under Article 229 of the Turkish Civil Code | Taking into account specific gratuitous transfers/dispositions that reduce the liquidation | The condition in the statute of gratuitous transfer or intent to reduce | Treating every sale as automatically void |
| Third-party claim under Article 241 of the Turkish Civil Code | Completing, to a certain extent, the participation claim that cannot be met from the spouse’s assets | Value to be added, shortfall in collection and special time limits | Thinking it directly produces the result of cancellation of title |
| Action for simulation / cancellation of title | Asserting that the apparent transaction or registration does not match the true legal position of rights | The fact of simulation/right in rem, the correct party and jurisdiction | Treating being merely a creditor under the matrimonial property regime as sufficient for a right in rem |
The choice between an injunction and a precautionary attachment should be made according to the right in rem or personal nature of the claim, the maturity of the claim, whether the asset is really the subject of the dispute and the danger of transfer. The actual implementation of the court’s decision in the land registry, traffic, bank, Central Securities Depository (Merkezi Kayıt Kuruluşu) or trade registry should be monitored separately.
In the petition for the request:
- The clear land registry/vehicle/company details of the asset
- The concrete fact showing the danger of transfer or diversion
- The proportion between the approximate claim amount and the injunction
- Whether a lighter instrument would suffice
- The legal reasons on security
should be shown.
Risk warning: An injunction in the liquidation case does not transfer ownership to the plaintiff. Whether the injunction has actually been implemented in the land registry or the relevant registry should be monitored separately.
Do transfers made for the purpose of diverting assets affect the liquidation?
If a spouse transfers property to someone else, is the right lost entirely?
No. Under Article 229 of the Turkish Civil Code, gratuitous transfers made without the other spouse’s consent in the year before the end of the matrimonial property regime, other than customary gifts, and transfers made by one spouse with the intent to reduce the other spouse’s participation claim, may be added in value to the acquired property.
The one-year period is for the first category only; it is not correct to limit the second category, based on the intent to reduce the participation claim, automatically to one year.
What is the relationship between a simulation action and the liquidation action?
Where it is alleged that the transfer was not actually made and the title is simulated, a separate action aimed at a right in rem or at depriving the disposition of effect and the liquidation action may affect each other. The decision of the Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu) dated April 16, 2025, E. 2023/4-618, K. 2025/231 adopted the approach that treats the determination of the matrimonial property regime claim as a preliminary question requiring a stay in an action for annulment of a disposition based on simulation. The decision of the 2nd Civil Chamber (Yargıtay 2. Hukuk Dairesi) dated September 11, 2025, E. 2024/9632, K. 2025/7125 stated that an action for cancellation and re-registration of title, which could change the owner of the immovable subject to liquidation, must be treated as a preliminary question requiring a stay in the liquidation action.
When is an action under Article 241 of the Turkish Civil Code filed against a third party?
If the assets or the estate of the debtor spouse do not cover the participation claim, the creditor spouse or the heirs may request payment, limited to the shortfall, from a third party who benefited from a gratuitous transfer added to the calculation under Article 229 of the Turkish Civil Code. The action must be filed within one year from learning that the rights were impaired and in any event within five years from the end of the matrimonial property regime. This special route does not produce the result of automatic cancellation of title in every transfer to a third party.
How are an interim injunction and protection of assets requested?
A matrimonial property regime action most often concerns a monetary claim. It therefore cannot be said that “when the action is filed, an injunction is automatically placed on all assets.” Under Article 389 and following of the Code of Civil Procedure, the prima facie proof that obtaining the right will become significantly more difficult or impossible, and the subject, scope, proportionality and security of the injunction, are evaluated.
Can an injunction be placed on the assets of a company in which the spouse is a shareholder?
A company share and the company’s own assets are not the same thing. The value that may be subject to liquidation is, as a rule, the company share registered in the spouse’s name and the property rights attached to that share. Movables, immovables, vehicles or bank accounts registered in the name of a company that has a separate legal entity and is not a party to the case do not become the subject of the liquidation action merely because the spouse is a shareholder.
In its final decision dated February 4, 2025, E. 2025/49, K. 2025/923 on resolving a disagreement between the regional courts of appeal (Bölge Adliye Mahkemeleri), the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation separated the defendant spouse’s company share and the rights attached to the share from the assets belonging to the company’s legal entity, and accepted that an interim injunction cannot additionally be placed on assets registered in the name of the company that is not a party to the case. This result does not mean that the transfer of the company share cannot be prevented or that the value of the share cannot be investigated. The injunction request should be directed at the right target: the spouse’s share, the profit or liquidation share, the claim against the company and other assets that really belong to the spouse.
If it is alleged that the company’s assets have been used by the spouse in a simulated manner or that personal assets have been moved into the company’s assets, this should be asserted not by requesting an automatic injunction while disregarding the legal entity, but by setting up together the valuation of the share, the trade registry and financial records, simulation, Article 229 of the Turkish Civil Code, the third party’s status as a party and, if necessary, a separate legal route.
How is safety protected in files involving violence or economic pressure?
If access to asset documents is blocked, or there is a risk of economic violence, threats or physical violence, the matrimonial property regime strategy should not be pursued alone. Protective and preventive measures under Law No. 6284, secure communication, address confidentiality and a document-sharing protocol should be planned separately. Messages and conduct that force a person to give up the asset claim should be preserved by lawful methods; a person at urgent safety risk should not be directed into a risky environment merely to collect economic evidence.
Frequently asked questions
How is an injunction requested to prevent my spouse from transferring property during the case?
For an interim injunction, the right to be protected, the concrete danger of transfer and the measure requested must be explained. Documents such as the land registry record, an advertisement for sale, preparation for a transfer or an account movement are important for prima facie proof. Unlimited blocking of all assets is not an automatic right. An injunction, a precautionary attachment and a restriction on disposal that protects the family union are distinguished in terms of purpose and conditions.
Do assets sold or transferred before the divorce remain outside the calculation?
No. Unusual gratuitous transfers made without consent within one year before the regime ended, and transfers made with the intent to reduce the participation claim, may be added to the calculation. If the actual sale price was kept or turned into another asset, that value is also investigated. The existence of a transfer does not by itself require cancellation of title; the routes of adding to the calculation and of an action against a third party are separate.
Which values no longer in my spouse’s assets can be added to the liquidation calculation?
Article 229 of the Turkish Civil Code regulates two different situations: specific gratuitous transfers within the year before the regime ended, and transfers made during the regime for the purpose of reducing the other spouse’s participation claim. In the second case the one-year limit does not apply in the same way; the intent to reduce must be proven. Ordinary expenditure, genuine debt payment and a sale that does not meet the conditions the statute requires are not added automatically.
How is property bought in a relative’s name with my spouse’s money investigated?
The true nature of the relationship between the person who paid and the registered owner is investigated. Bank movements, the sale contract, use, the source of the price and the parties’ statements are evaluated together. The allegation that the spouse’s money was used does not by itself turn property registered in a relative’s name into the spouse’s property. Adding value to the liquidation calculation, simulation or another claim for a receivable may require different conditions.
Which legal routes can be considered against the third party who took over the property?
A gratuitous transfer, simulation and annulment of a disposition are not the same action. For Article 241, what is required is that the debtor spouse’s assets are not enough to pay the claim and that there is a gratuitous transfer that must be taken into account; liability is limited to the shortfall amount. One year from learning of the impairment of the right and, in any case, five years from the end of the regime are important. The party, time limit and proof conditions of the other legal routes are determined separately.
Related articles
- How Is Property Divided in a Divorce? A Guide to Matrimonial Property Regime Actions
- How Are Assets Investigated in a Property Division Case? Bank, Land Registry and Other Evidence
- How Is a Property Division Action Filed? Court, Type of Action, Fees and Claims
- Can the Family Residence Be Sold Without the Spouse’s Consent? Annotation, Cancellation of Title and Third Party
- Economic Violence and Secure Document Collection in Property Division: How Are Rights Protected?
This article is for general legal information. In a specific dispute, the dates of the events, the documents, the type of claim and the time limits are evaluated together.
Sources and legal bases
- Law No. 4721, Turkish Civil Code (4721 sayılı Türk Medeni Kanunu)
- Law No. 6098, Turkish Code of Obligations (6098 sayılı Türk Borçlar Kanunu)
- Law No. 6100, Code of Civil Procedure (6100 sayılı Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu)
- Law No. 2004, Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (2004 sayılı İcra ve İflas Kanunu)
- Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu), E. 2023/4-618, K. 2025/231, April 16, 2025
- 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 2. Hukuk Dairesi), E. 2024/9632, K. 2025/7125, September 11, 2025
- 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 2. Hukuk Dairesi), E. 2025/49, K. 2025/923, February 4, 2025