Turkey: Decision Of Joint Jurisprudence Declaring That The Lack Of Justification Shall Not Constitute Grounds For Denial Of Enforcement Of Foreign Judgments


There is a difference of jurisprudence between the 2. and 13. Civil Chambers of the Court of Appeals whether enforcement of (final) judgments which do not include any justification constitutes incompliance with the ordre public. The Court of Appeals Grand Chamber of Unification of Jurisprudence conclusively decided on whether the lack of justification constitutes an obstacle to enforcement, to resolve this jurisprudential difference. The decision of the board with Case numbered 2010/1, Decision numbered 2012/1 dated 10 February 2012 ("Decision") was published in the Official Gazette dated 20 September 2012 numbered 28417. This Decision and its justification shall be assessed in this article.

Enforcement of foreign court judgments

As elaborated on in detail in the newsletter article entitled "Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Foreign Judgments" which was published in the Newsletter issue of March 2012, the enforcement of foreign court judgments are subject to the provisions of International Private and Procedure Law No. 5718 ("IPPL"). In order for a foreign court judgment to be enforced (a) there should be contractual, statutory or actual reciprocity with the relevant foreign country with regards to enforcement, (b) the matter resolved upon by the judgment shall not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of Turkish courts (such as claims related to the rights in rem over an immovable property), (c) the person against whom the enforcement is sought should have not been improperly summoned, or not represented in court or, a default judgment should not have been rendered against him which was contrary to the laws of that country, and (d) it shouldn't explicitly violate Turkish ordre public (art. 54 of IPPL).

Jurisprudential difference

Court of Appeals 2. Civil Chamber has amended its jurisprudence1 declaring foreign judgments not including any justification being in violation of the Turkish public order. In its decision in the year 20062, it declared that the court shall disregard the accuracy of a judgment, the applied provisions and the legal or procedural determinations thereunder whilst considering enforcement, and therefore that the lack of justification shall not constitute a violation of public order. The decision also underlines that explicit violation of public order is limited to events such as violation of fundamental rights and freedoms regulated under the Constitution, fundamental legal principles accepted by international law, right to fair trial and right to defense.

Court of Appeals 13. Civil Chamber, on the other hand, states in its decisions3 that the lack of justification in foreign court judgments shall constitute violation of the Constitution and of the public order. Therefore, it accepts that lack of justification of foreign court judgments constitutes obstacles in recognition and enforcement of such awards. The Court of Appeals Assembly of Civil Chambers has not adopted a decision governing the enforcement of judgments not including any justification.

The jurisprudential difference between the Civil Chambers of the Court of Appeals arises from whether the lack of justification of foreign court judgments constitutes an explicit violation of the public order or not.

Justification and the public order

The explicit violation of Turkish public order is regulated as an obstacle to the enforcement of foreign court awards under the IPPL. The State, in principle, waives its sovereign right to rule on conflicts over which its own courts have jurisdiction and adopt the decision of a foreign court while enforcing a decision. Consequently, the sovereign right of the state is exercised by the bodies of another state.  Therefore, violation of the public order is a materially important obstacle to the enforcement of foreign court awards.

The concept of public order is dependent on the time and place, and its content and limits may not be precisely delimited. The Court of Appeals has assessed, in the justification of the Decision, the relevant provisions of Turkish law and how such provisions shall be taken into consideration with regards to enforcement, in order to determine whether the lack of justification constitutes a violation of public order or not.

Justification under Turkish law

Article 141 of the Constitution of 1982 regulates that court judgments shall include justification. Article 297 of the Civil Procedural Code numbered 6100 (as well as article 388 of the abrogated Civil Procedural Code numbered 1086) stipulates that the judgment shall include (in its justification) the matters on which the parties have or have not agreed, the proof for contested matters, discussion and assessment of proof, the deducted conclusion and the legal cause. Court judgments shall include a justification as per Turkish law. The justification of judgments derives from public order. The justification shall justify the judgment and is binding. The justification states how the claims and defense of the parties are assessed. It is apparent that under the Turkish law the justification is directly in relation to the fundamental right to defense.

Public order and prohibition of revision au fond

The investigation made for the enforcement regarding whether the public order has been explicitly violated or not comprehends an assessment of whether the legal consequences of enforcement of the foreign judgment in Turkey are in violation of the public order or not. Nevertheless, while assessing the noncompliance with public order, the prohibition to review the merits of the case must be taken into consideration. The court handling the enforcement request may not disregard this prohibition by using its discretion. Assessment for enforcement is limited to identification of the existence of requisite conditions for enforcement. The due application of law and procedural provisions to the merits of the foreign judgment may not be inspected (art 54 of IPPL).

The formal and material content of justification under the Turkish law is regulated by the Civil Procedure Code. The justification is subject to the lex fori principle, as it is a matter of procedural law. Foreign states may provide for different provisions under their procedural law rules with respect to the justification. Therefore, the lack of justification in a judgment and the violation of the fundamental right to defense should be assessed as separate and independent matters; and the mere lack of justification in foreign judgments should not be assessed as a violation of public order per se.

Turkish legal rules concerning verdicts under Turkish law should not be applicable by analogy to a foreign court judgment regarded as a "verdict" as per the procedural rules of a foreign state. Drawing conclusions from the existence or lack of justification in the foreign judgments shall constitute assessment of compliance of the foreign verdict with the civil and procedural Turkish law. This constitutes violation of the prohibition revision au fond. Any procedure to the contrary shall constitute a renewal of the litigation procedure by Turkish courts.

The criteria to be taken into account for enforcement are whether the verdict of the foreign decision explicitly violates the Turkish public order or not. Bearing the prohibition of revision au fond in mind, in order for the procedural law applied to a judgment to constitute an obstacle to its enforcement, it shall per se violate the principles of due and fair trial, prevent any defense and constitute a violation of the Turkish public order.

The justification of the Decision specifically states that, instead of the differences with the Turkish law or incompliances with mandatory legal Turkish provisions of foreign judgments; what shall be taken into consideration is whether the fundamental values of Turkish law, the general public moral and main legal policy, fundamental rights and freedoms, concept of justice are violated by such foreign judgment or not.

Decision of the Court of Appeals Grand Chamber of Unification of Jurisprudence

The Court of Appeals Grand Chamber of Unification of Jurisprudence has resolved with a majority exceeding two thirds of the votes that "the mere lack of justification of foreign judgments shall not prevent the enforcement of final foreign court judgments". The Decision states that the justification is a concept of procedural law and thus the declaration of foreign court judgments not including any justification in violation of the public order is regarded as a violation of the prohibition of revision au fond. Whilst assessing compliance with public order, violation of fundamental principles and the concept of justice as well as fundamental rights and freedoms shall be taken into consideration instead of violation of any mandatory provision under Turkish law.

Nonetheless, the chair and members of the Court of Appeal 13th Civil Chamber have given negative votes to the Decision and submitted their dissenting opinion. The dissenting opinion states that violation of the public order may only be assessed with the justification of a judgment. The members having given negative votes affirm that the verdict section of a judgment is a mere statement of conclusions with respect to the claims and that compliance with the public order may only be assessed once the verdict and the justification are regarded as a whole.


The Civil Chambers of the Court of Appeals had adopted different jurisprudence with respect to whether the lack of justification of foreign court judgments constitutes an explicit violation of the public order or not. Therefore, the Court of Appeals Grand Chamber of Unification of Jurisprudence resolved this difference by its Decision adopted on 10 February 2012.

Justification is a matter of procedural law. Although Turkish law relates the existence of justification with public order, foreign states may have adopted different rules of procedure. The foreign court judgments are subject to their own procedural laws. Declaring foreign judgments as explicitly in violation of Turkish public order based on the mere lack of justification constitutes a violation of the prohibition of revision au fond regulated under the IPPL. Whether the foreign verdict explicitly violates the Turkish public order or not shall be taken into regard when compliance with public order is assessed for the sake of enforcing such decision.

The Civil Chambers of the Court of Appeals has therefore, with the majority of the votes, declared that foreign judgments may not be deprived of enforcement or be declared explicitly in violation of Turkish public order merely for the lack of justification.


1. Decision dated 30.06.1999 with Case numbered 1999/5858 and Decision numbered 1999/7609.

2. Decision dated 08.06.2006 with Case numbered 2006/2612 and Decision numbered 2006/9147.

3. Decision dated 05.12.2001 with Case numbered 2001/9007and Decision numbered 2001/11406 and decision dated 02.10.2003 with Case numbered 2003/6226and Decision numbered 2001/11095.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions