Creating a pledge over a company share gives the creditor the possibility of collecting from the value of the share; it does not by itself transfer shareholding or voting rights to the creditor. Usufruct, in turn, affects the right to benefit from the share and, to the extent determined by law, the representation of the share. As important as which transaction is made is whether the company is a limited or a joint-stock company, whether the share is embodied in a certificate, and whether it is tracked in book-entry form. Using the same contract text for every type of share may mean that the security never comes into existence or cannot be asserted against the company. [1, 2]
Three checks in particular should be made together: Which right does the contract actually create; is a notary certification, delivery of the certificate or company approval required for the right to arise; and what legal effect do the records kept at the company and at the registry institution produce? Signing the contract, making the required delivery and entering the matter in the relevant record are different steps. Completing one does not in every case cure a deficiency in another.
How Are Share Pledge, Usufruct, Share Transfer and Attachment Distinguished?
A pledge is a legal relationship that secures a specific or determinable claim. A partner may pledge a share for its own debt, as well as for the debt of the company or of another person. The debtor and the pledgor need not be the same person. In that case, unless the shareholder additionally assumes a personal obligation such as joining in the debt or giving a suretyship, the shareholder is not liable for the whole debt with all of its assets merely because the share was pledged. [2, 3]
When usufruct is created, ownership of the share is retained and the authority to benefit from it is left to another person. In a share transfer, by contrast, the shareholder changes. Attachment is a compulsory enforcement measure the creditor resorts to within enforcement proceedings; it is not the same as a pledge created by agreement of the parties. The enforcement of a private claim under the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (İİK) must also not be confused with the collection of a public claim under Law No. 6183. The route for realizing a pledge explained in this article makes no claim to explain all the rules of public-law attachment.
| Transaction | Main purpose | Does the shareholder change? | Main effect on voting rights |
|---|---|---|---|
| Share pledge | Securing a claim with the value of the share | Does not change when the pledge is created | A pledge alone does not confer voting authority |
| Usufruct over a share | Granting the right to benefit from the share | Remains with the bare owner | Depending on the type of company, the usufructuary's authority to represent/vote comes into question |
| Share transfer | Passing shareholding to the transferee | Changes upon a valid transfer | Conditions for enforceability against the company are examined separately |
| Share attachment | Collecting the enforced claim through compulsory enforcement | Does not change at the time of attachment | The attaching creditor cannot vote automatically |
The pledge of a partner's share does not mean that the company's real estate, bank accounts or machinery are also pledged. The subject of the security is the partner's share, not the company's own assets. The company's economic condition affects the value of the share; but this economic link does not give the creditor a direct pledge over the company's assets. [1, 2]
What Conditions Are Required to Pledge Shares in a Limited Company?
Written contract and notary certification of signatures
Article 955(3) of the Turkish Civil Code (TMK) requires, for the pledge of other rights, compliance with the form prescribed for the transfer of the right in addition to a written contract. Read together with Article 595(1) of the Turkish Commercial Code (TTK), which governs the transfer of shares in a limited company, the share pledge contract must be in writing and the signatures of the parties must be certified by a notary. The fact that the articles of association do not require general assembly approval for a pledge does not remove this formal requirement. A notary drafting the contract from scratch and a notary certifying signatures are not the same thing; what the statutory link requires here is notary certification of signatures. [1, 2, 7]
The share to be pledged should be identified without room for doubt by the company's trade name, trade registry information, share group, nominal value and amount of shares. The source of the secured debt, the debtor, the creditor, the scope and, if any, the security cap should also be made concrete. Merely writing "all shares are security" may give rise to a serious dispute over scope with respect to shares acquired on different dates and future debts.
General assembly approval and refusal for just cause
Under Article 600(2) TTK, the articles of association may make the creation of a pledge subject to approval by the general assembly. If there is such a provision, the rules on the transfer of the share apply. Approval is not a permission that the company's manager can give alone; under Article 616(2)(c) TTK it is a non-transferable power of the general assembly. [1]
A just cause is required to refuse approval of a pledge. The possibility of refusal without cause that exists in an ordinary transfer of limited company shares cannot be applied to a pledge as it stands. The ground for refusal must be tied to the concrete features of the pledge transaction; it must not be used merely to deprive the partner of financing. On the other hand, a ban on share transfers in the articles of association or special restrictions on pledges must be examined together with the transferability requirement in Article 954 TMK. [1, 2, 7]
If an approval application has been made and has not been refused within three months, it may be deemed that approval has been given by reference to Article 595(7) TTK. The period runs not from the date of the notarized contract but from the application made to the company. The content of the application and the date on which it reached the company should be preserved in a provable form. It is not safe to assume that approval has arisen on the basis of an incomplete notice or a notice relating to another transaction.
Share ledger and delivery of certificates
In a limited company, pledges and usufruct rights are entered in the share ledger together with the details of the right holders. This entry under Article 594 TTK does not replace the required formalities and approvals. The share ledger entry, which as a rule is declaratory in nature, should be kept distinct from the transactions that create the right. [1, 7]
Representing a limited company share by an instrument of evidence or by a registered certificate does not turn it into a joint-stock company share certificate. The nature of the certificate and whether delivery is mandatory have been debated in the literature. Because of this debate, where a certificate exists it is necessary, in addition to the notary form, to regulate expressly the delivery and safekeeping of the existing certificates, to draw up a delivery record and to bring the share ledger into line with the transaction. Merely endorsing a limited company share and pledging it like a joint-stock company share is not sufficient. [1, 7]
How Is a Pledge Created over Joint-Stock Company Shares?
Shares not embodied in a certificate, registered shares and bearer shares
For a share in a joint-stock company that is not embodied in a certificate, in other words a bare share, a written contract aimed at creating the pledge is required. A preliminary agreement promising that a pledge will be created in the future must be distinguished from the disposition that creates the right now. The two transactions may appear in the same document; however, a mere undertaking to pledge does not complete an incomplete creation transaction by itself. [2, 8]
For a bearer share certificate, in addition to the pledge agreement, possession of the certificate must be transferred for the purpose of the pledge. Article 956(1) TMK is based on delivery of the certificate to the pledgee. Recording the intent to pledge, the certificate numbers and the delivery in a written record matters for proof; if the certificate in fact remains solely in the pledgor's control, a pledge dependent on delivery does not arise. [2]
For a registered share certificate, within the framework of Article 956(2) TMK, a pledge endorsement, or a written transfer/pledge declaration linked to the certificate, together with the transfer of possession is assessed jointly. Providing a photocopy of the certificate does not replace delivery of the original certificate. For interim certificates (ilmühaber) as well, the reference made by Article 486(2) TTK to registered share certificates is taken into account. [1, 2, 8]
Company approval, share ledger and visibility of the pledge
Article 492 TTK, which makes the transfer of a registered share subject to company approval, expressly extends this restriction to usufruct; the same extension has not been made for pledges. For this reason, it is not correct to apply the approval condition for share transfers automatically merely on the ground that the share is being pledged. Special laws, the company's acceptance of a pledge over its own shares, and contractual undertakings are examined separately. [1, 8]
In a pledge of joint-stock company shares, it is useful to notify the company and make the pledge visible in the records. However, a note made in the share ledger does not substitute for the required transfer of possession of the certificate or for the written pledge transaction. Moreover, the registration of the shareholder and of the usufructuary under Article 499 TTK is not the same matter as the arising of the pledge right.
If the company takes its own shares as a pledge, the special limits starting with Article 379 TTK apply. Therefore, the approach that "a partner may pledge its own share to anyone on the same terms" is not sufficient where the creditor is the joint-stock company to which the share belongs. [1]
How Are MKK Records, HPKS and Book-Entry Share Collateral Distinguished?
For capital market instruments tracked in book-entry form at the Central Securities Depository of Türkiye (MKK), Articles 13 and 47 of the Capital Markets Law (SPKn) and Communiqué No. II-13.1 apply. In a written collateral agreement, ownership remaining with the collateral provider and ownership being transferred to the collateral taker by the statutory procedure are separate models. If there is no provision that ownership will pass, it is accepted that it does not pass. Pledge and usufruct documents are submitted to the relevant member; the transaction is reflected in the MKK records in accordance with Article 22 of the Communiqué. For assertion against third parties, the date of notification to the MKK matters. [4, 5, 6]
Tracking a physical bearer share certificate in the Bearer Share Registration System (HPKS) does not automatically turn that certificate into a book-entry capital market instrument. It cannot be said that the powers to use special collateral under Article 47 SPKn arise automatically for a company share with an HPKS record. First, the legal regime and the account in which the share is tracked must be determined. [1, 4, 6]
This distinction also has consequences for the method to be followed when the debt is not paid. Adding the direct sale or transfer-of-ownership provisions for book-entry collateral to a contract used for a physical certificate does not bring the transaction within Article 47 SPKn. Keeping the share ledger electronically does not change this classification either.
How Is Usufruct over a Share Created and What Does It Cover?
Form of creation and recognition by the company
The general basis of usufruct is Article 794 TMK and the following articles. For a bare joint-stock share, a written usufruct transaction; for a physical bearer certificate, the transfer of possession for the purpose of usufruct; and for a registered share certificate, the form for transferring negotiable instruments together with the transfer of possession, are considered jointly. It should be made clear in the endorsement or the linked written document that the purpose of the transaction is to create usufruct, not to transfer ownership. [1, 2]
For registered shares, the restriction in the articles of association requiring company approval also applies to usufruct under Article 492(2) TTK. Under Article 499 TTK, it must be proved that the usufruct was duly created and the right holder must be entered in the share ledger; in relations with the company this entry is the basis. For this reason, the signing of a usufruct contract between the parties and its becoming enforceable against the company at the general assembly are examined separately. [1]
For limited company shares, Article 600(1) TTK refers directly to the provisions on the transfer of shares in the capital. The written transaction, the notary certification of signatures and any general assembly approval required under the articles of association are assessed. The rule that for a pledge approval is required only if provided in the articles of association cannot be applied in the same way to usufruct. [1, 14]
Dividends, protection of capital and duration of the right
Usufruct gives the right to benefit from the income of the share; it does not create a payment obligation of its own accord without distributable profit in the company or without the required distribution resolution. Which period periodic income belongs to is examined together with the start and end dates of the usufruct. Article 805 TMK matters for periodic income belonging to the duration of the usufruct, even if it falls due later. [2]
By contrast, the liquidation proceeds, the value returned because of a capital reduction and the right to subscribe to new shares cannot be treated like ordinary periodic income. The value that makes up the substance of the share must be distinguished from the income derived from it; the effect of an existing usufruct on the value that takes the place of the share must be determined separately on the basis of the TMK provisions and the nature of the transaction. Merely writing "all income belongs to the usufructuary" in the contract does not leave to the usufructuary every disposition affecting the company's capital. [2, 14]
The transfer of the usufruct right itself and leaving its exercise to another are also different. If the conditions of Article 806 TMK are met, exercise may be transferred. Usufruct in favor of a natural person ends at the latest on the right holder's death; usufruct in favor of a legal entity ends according to the statutory time rules and cannot continue for more than one hundred years. A specific end date or an end tied to performance of the debt may also be established in the contract. [2]
Usufruct over a share is not the usufruct certificate (intifa senedi) issued under Articles 502–503 TTK. The holder of a usufruct certificate is not granted shareholder rights; the similar names of the two institutions do not mean that they confer the same authority at the general assembly. [1]
Can the Holder of a Pledge or Usufruct Vote at the General Assembly?
The pledgee's authority
Under Article 960 TMK, the authority to represent a pledged share certificate at the general assembly belongs to the shareholder. The pledgee cannot attend the general assembly as a shareholder merely because it holds the certificate. The fact that Article 427(2) TTK requires special written authorization for a person who holds a bearer certificate by reason of a pledge also shows this distinction. [1, 2]
A loan agreement may contain an undertaking to obtain the creditor's permission for important decisions. However, this undertaking does not give the creditor, of its own accord, the status of a company organ or a statutory right to vote. If a pledge and usufruct are created together, the conditions for creating each right must be completed separately; merely giving the contract the heading "pledge and usufruct" should not be considered sufficient.
Voting by the usufructuary and protection of the shareholder
In a joint-stock company, under Article 432(2) TTK, unless otherwise agreed, the voting right is exercised by the usufructuary. The usufructuary is nevertheless under a duty to give fair consideration to the interests of the shareholder. In a limited company, Article 600(3) TTK regulates the representation of the share by the usufructuary and the same duty to consider interests. The difference in the text between the types of company should not be overlooked, and every contractual solution used in a joint-stock company should not be carried over unchanged to a limited company. [1, 14]
In the decision of the Istanbul Regional Court of Appeal 12th Civil Chamber dated February 17, 2022, E.2019/1874, K.2022/213, a usufruct contract over joint-stock company shares was examined. Despite a contract provision requiring the shareholder's written instruction on certain matters, it was determined that the resolution in dispute was not among those exceptions, and the usufructuary's voting by representation was not regarded as irregular in the specific case. The practical need shown by this decision is not to be content with a general instruction clause, but to regulate expressly which authority is granted for which decisions. The decision is not a general rule granting unconditional freedom to vote under all usufruct contracts. [9]
Can a Pledged Share Be Transferred; Does a Capital Increase Affect the Security?
The existence of a pledge does not mean that all of the shareholder's powers of disposition disappear. Nevertheless, a sale, a second pledge, the creation of usufruct and the delivery of the certificate elsewhere must be assessed together with the existing pledge, the company's restrictions and the contractual undertakings. It should not be assumed that the earlier security is lifted automatically when the transfer to the new buyer takes place. [2]
In its decision dated May 16, 2024, E.2023/1386, K.2024/4015, the Court of Cassation 11th Civil Chamber examined a transfer dispute concerning a registered share certificate pledged at a bank. The Chamber stated that a registered share can be transferred by assignment, but upheld the dismissal, taking as its basis that the condition of delivery of the certificate to the transferee had not been fulfilled in the specific case. This decision does not mean that "a pledged share can never be transferred"; it requires that, in addition to the written sale contract, the necessary act of transferring possession be legally completed. [10]
A capital increase, however, may change the value of the security. Whether the right to subscribe to new shares and whether the new shares are included in the existing pledge are different questions. The consequences of increases made against payment and from internal sources should not be treated as the same. The contract should regulate notification of the capital increase, determination of the new shares, an additional pledge transaction if required, delivery/registration, and the conditions for additional collateral in case of a loss in value. An undertaking to create a pledge over the new shares does not provide the same security as a pledge for which the required formalities have been completed. [2, 8]
How Is a Share Pledge Realized if the Debt Is Not Paid?
Resorting to the pledge first and the time limits in the proceedings
Under Article 45 İİK, the rule for a claim secured by a pledge is that recourse is first had to realization of the pledge. If the security proves insufficient, pursuit of the remaining claim through attachment or bankruptcy and the certificate of pledge deficiency are considered. The exception provided in Article 167 İİK for proceedings specific to negotiable instruments is reserved; the same claim cannot be collected through more than one route. [3]
In the realization of a movable pledge without a court judgment, the pledged share and, if any, the third-party pledgor are specified in the enforcement request. Under Article 146 İİK, a payment order is sent to the debtor and to the third party who owns the pledge. The payment period is fifteen days and the objection period is seven days. If the pledge right itself is to be objected to, this objection must be made expressly; it should not be assumed that an objection to the debt alone also opens the pledge right to dispute to the same extent. [3]
The important distinction in time limits concerns the request for sale: Article 150/e İİK provides a six-month period, running from service of the payment order or enforcement order, for requesting sale in a movable pledge. Statutory situations, such as the period not running because of an objection or a lawsuit, are assessed separately. Applying the period for requesting sale in general attachment to the realization of a pledge as it stands may lead to loss of rights. If sale is not requested in time, or if a withdrawn request is not renewed in time, the proceedings lapse. [3]
If the claim or the pledge right has been established in a court judgment or in a document having the quality of a judgment, the procedure under Article 150/h İİK is assessed separately. It cannot be said that every notarized pledge contract, regardless of its content, is a basis for enforcement proceedings based on a judgment.
The position of the person who acquires the share through sale
The acquisition of a limited company share through enforcement is subject to the special regime in Article 596 TTK. No prior general assembly approval is required for the transfer of rights and obligations. The company may exercise its statutory power of refusal by making an offer to take over the share at its real value within three months of learning of the acquisition. The approval requirement of an ordinary voluntary share transfer should not be carried over as it stands to a compulsory sale. [1]
For unlisted registered joint-stock company shares, the special consequences in Articles 493(4) and 494(2) TTK are examined with respect to acquisition through compulsory enforcement. In valuing the security, not only the nominal value but also the company's financial condition, the rights the share provides, the existing encumbrances and the company-law rules that will apply after the sale must be taken into account.
Can it be agreed that the share passes automatically to the creditor?
Under the general pledge regime, a clause providing that, if the debt is not paid, the pledged share will automatically pass into the creditor's ownership is invalid under Article 949 TMK. A pledge contract cannot be turned into a tool for handing over to the creditor, without consideration, a share worth far more than the debt. [2]
However, book-entry capital market instrument collateral under Article 47 SPKn is subject to a special regime. Under the conditions set by the law, there may be the possibility of sale or of transferring ownership and setting off. In the model where ownership remains with the collateral provider, the authority to transfer ownership must be expressly provided for in the contract; for unlisted instruments, the valuation method must be determined; and the statutory market value rules and the return of any surplus value are required. This exception cannot be generalized to an ordinary limited company share pledge or to a physical certificate with only an HPKS record. [4]
How Should the Contract, Evidence and Dispute Management Be Structured?
| Record to examine | Basic question to resolve |
|---|---|
| Articles of association and amendments | Are there a transfer/pledge ban, approvals and special rights? |
| Shareholding, original certificates, share ledger | Over which share is the pledgor or the person creating the usufruct authorized? |
| Underlying debt contract and payment records | Which claim is secured, and to what extent? |
| Pledge/usufruct contract and notary documents | Are the right created, its duration, its limits and its form clear? |
| Delivery record and safekeeping documents | Where is the certificate; who holds it, and in what capacity? |
| Company application, resolution and MKK records | On what date were the approval, notification and registration steps completed? |
| Acceleration, warning notices and enforcement notifications | Has the right to pursue arisen; when did the objection and sale periods begin? |
The contract should specifically regulate payment of dividends or their set-off against the debt, voting instructions, new shares, a second pledge, safekeeping of the certificates and lifting of the security when the debt ends. If a notice has been given to the debtor of a claim included in the pledge, the payment and deposit rules in Article 961 TMK are taken into account. Under Article 959 TMK, whether periodic income and coupons are included in the pledge is determined separately; the pledgee does not become, of its own accord, a payee of every profit distribution. [2]
When the debt has fully ended, the return of the certificates to the right holder and the removal of the relevant pledge records should be completed with concrete documents. On the other hand, the claim becoming time-barred does not necessarily mean that the pledge has ended; Article 159 of the Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK) preserves the power to collect from the pledge for a claim secured by a movable pledge. Time-bar must be distinguished from the debt ending through payment or release. [11]
Whether the dispute arises from company law, relates only to the pledge contract or has the nature of a complaint against an enforcement act changes the competent authority and the available remedy. Under Articles 4–5 TTK, the commercial nature of the case and the jurisdiction of the commercial court of first instance are determined according to the specific claim. In commercial cases, mediation as a condition precedent to litigation under Article 5/A TTK is considered separately for money claims/compensation and for the claims listed in the law, such as annulment of objection, negative declaratory action and restitution. A mere declaration of the pledge or an enforcement complaint cannot be subjected to the same procedure as a money claim lawsuit. [1]
If the disposal of the certificate, mutually contradictory records or unlawful voting create a concrete and imminent danger, an interim injunction suited to the subject of the dispute may be requested under the conditions of Article 389 of the Code of Civil Procedure (HMK) and the following articles. The injunction should be set up proportionately to the right claimed and the danger; stopping all of the company's activities should not be regarded as the natural result of every share dispute. For a pre-action injunction, the enforcement and filing periods in Articles 393 and 397 HMK must be followed together with the special effects of Article 18/A of the Law on Mediation in Legal Disputes (HUAK), if mediation has been applied for. [12, 13]
Conclusion
Creating a reliable pledge or usufruct over a share depends on correctly matching, in the same file, the type of company, the legal form of the share, and the required approval and delivery steps. A pledge provides security; usufruct affects the arrangement of benefit and representation. Even in transactions where the two rights are used together, the creation, scope and termination of each must be determined separately.
Having only a signed contract at the end of the transaction is not enough. The required notary certification, company resolution, certificate delivery and records must be complete; which enforcement or special collateral regime will apply if the debt is not paid should be clarified in advance. In particular, when voting authority, dividends, capital increases and release of the security are left open, using a security that appears strong may turn into a new dispute.
Related articles: Limited Company Share Transfer: Notary, Approval and Registration; Joint-Stock Company Share Transfer: Share Ledger and MKK Notification; Attachment of Company Shares: Enforcement in Limited and Joint-Stock Companies; Unpaid Capital Debt: Interest, Default and Forfeiture.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is notary certification required for a pledge of limited company shares?
When Article 955(3) TMK and Article 595(1) TTK are applied together, a written contract and notary certification of the parties' signatures are required. General assembly approval is assessed separately, depending on whether the articles of association provide for it for a pledge.
Does the person who takes a share as a pledge become a company partner?
No. Creating a pledge does not transfer shareholding to the creditor. The position may change if the creditor acquires the share as a result of a proper sale or of applicable special collateral provisions.
Who votes at the general assembly with a pledged share?
A pledge alone does not give voting rights; as a rule, the authority rests with the shareholder. If there is valid authority of representation or a separately created usufruct, their scope is assessed.
Can the usufructuary directly demand a profit distribution?
Usufruct does not create a right to payment independent of realized distributable profit and the company's distribution regime. The period to which the income decided to be distributed belongs and the scope of the usufruct contract are decisive.
Is there a one-year period for requesting sale of a pledged share?
It must not be confused with the period in general attachment. Under Article 150/e İİK, the period for requesting sale in a movable pledge is six months from service of the payment order or enforcement order; statutory situations affecting the calculation of the period are examined separately.
If the debt is not paid, do the shares pass directly to the creditor?
Under the general pledge regime, a clause providing for automatic transfer of ownership cannot be accepted as valid. For book-entry collateral under Article 47 SPKn, there are separate possibilities subject to statutory and contractual conditions. An HPKS record alone does not create this special regime.
Does a share pledge also place a pledge on the company's assets?
No. The partner's share and the company's own assets are different. Unless a separate valid security is created over the company's assets, a share pledge gives no direct right over those assets.
If the debt becomes time-barred, is the share pledge lifted?
This result cannot be drawn automatically. Under Article 159 TBK, while the limitation period runs for the claim, the power to collect from the movable pledge may continue.
Sources
- Law No. 6102 on the Turkish Commercial Code (Türk Ticaret Kanunu), in particular Arts. 4–5/A, 125, 379–389, 427, 432, 486, 490–499, 502–503, 593–600, 616. Ministry of Justice, current text.
- Law No. 4721 on the Turkish Civil Code (Türk Medenî Kanunu), in particular Arts. 794–806, 939, 943–949, 954–961, 979. Ministry of Justice, current text.
- Law No. 2004 on Enforcement and Bankruptcy (İcra ve İflas Kanunu), in particular Arts. 45, 145–147, 150/e–150/h, 152, 167. Ministry of Justice, current text.
- Law No. 6362 on Capital Markets (Sermaye Piyasası Kanunu), Arts. 13 and 47. Ministry of Justice, current text.
- Capital Markets Board, Communiqué on the Procedures and Principles for Keeping Records of Dematerialized Capital Market Instruments (Kaydileştirilen Sermaye Piyasası Araçlarına İlişkin Kayıtların Tutulmasının Usul ve Esasları Hakkında Tebliğ) (II-13.1), in particular Arts. 5, 22 and 26. Text published by the MKK.
- Central Securities Depository of Türkiye (Merkezi Kayıt Kuruluşu), "Legal Transactions" ("Hukuki İşlemler"). Institutional practice explanation.
- Ramazan Durgut, "Creating a Pledge over the Share in the Basic Capital of a Limited Company", TBB Dergisi (Journal of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations), 2013, No. 108, pp. 123–138; in particular pp. 131–136. Full text.
- Mehmet Serkan Ergüne, "Creating a Pledge over a Joint-Stock Company Share", İstanbul Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Mecmuası (Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Law), 2016, Vol. 74, No. 2, pp. 739–755; in particular pp. 742–752. Full text.
- Istanbul Regional Court of Appeal 12th Civil Chamber (İstanbul Bölge Adliye Mahkemesi 12. Hukuk Dairesi), February 17, 2022, E.2019/1874, K.2022/213. De Jure decision text — access may require an account.
- Court of Cassation 11th Civil Chamber (Yargıtay 11. Hukuk Dairesi), May 16, 2024, E.2023/1386, K.2024/4015. De Jure decision text — access may require an account.
- Law No. 6098 on the Turkish Code of Obligations (Türk Borçlar Kanunu), Art. 159. Ministry of Justice, current text.
- Law No. 6100 on Civil Procedure (Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu), Arts. 389–397. Ministry of Justice, current text.
- Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Legal Disputes (Hukuk Uyuşmazlıklarında Arabuluculuk Kanunu), Art. 18/A. Ministry of Justice, current text.
- Seda Baş, "Attachment, Pledge and Usufruct over Shares in Limited Companies", Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi (Journal of the Süleyman Demirel University Faculty of Law), 2021, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 903–940; in particular pp. 920–934. Full text.