Can a foreign creditor arrest a ship in Turkey for an unpaid invoice? Learn which invoices qualify as maritime claims, vessel arrest requirements, counter-security, foreign-flagged ships, sister-ship arrest, release against security and debt recovery procedures in Turkey.

An unpaid invoice in the shipping industry can become a serious recovery problem very quickly. A bunker supplier may have supplied fuel to a vessel but remain unpaid. A Turkish or foreign ship repair company may be waiting for substantial repair costs. A port agent may have outstanding disbursements. A tug operator, ship supplier, charterer or maritime service provider may face the same problem.

Meanwhile, the vessel may remain in a Turkish port for only a few hours.

Once it sails, obtaining effective security can become significantly more difficult.

For qualifying maritime claims, Turkish law provides one of the most powerful remedies available to a creditor: precautionary arrest of the vessel.

However, an important distinction must be made from the beginning:

Not every unpaid invoice gives the creditor a right to arrest a ship in Turkey.

Under Articles 1352 and following of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102, the underlying receivable must qualify as a maritime claim. Article 1353 specifically provides that a vessel may be arrested to secure maritime claims and that arrest cannot be ordered for a claim falling outside the statutory maritime-claim categories. (timdrayton.com)

For foreign creditors, correctly classifying the invoice before the vessel leaves Turkish waters is therefore critical.

Can a Foreign Creditor Arrest a Vessel in Turkey for an Unpaid Invoice?

Potentially, yes.

But the fact that an invoice is unpaid is not enough by itself.

The creditor must establish that the debt arises from one of the maritime claims recognized under Article 1352 of the Turkish Commercial Code.

The Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 is the principal domestic legislation governing the regime.

The creditor must therefore ask two separate questions:

Is the invoice legally payable?

and

Does the underlying debt qualify as a maritime claim allowing arrest of the vessel?

Only after answering both should an arrest application be prepared.

What Is a Maritime Claim in Turkey?

Article 1352 contains a closed list of maritime claims capable of supporting ship arrest.

The categories include numerous claims directly connected with the ownership, operation, employment or commercial use of vessels.

Depending on the facts, they may include claims arising from loss or damage caused by operation of the ship, loss of life or personal injury, salvage, environmental damage, charterparty disputes, carriage of goods, loss or damage to cargo, towage, pilotage, supplies to a vessel, construction and repair, port dues, crew wages, ship-related disbursements, insurance premiums, agency commissions, ownership disputes, mortgages and contracts for the sale of ships. (timdrayton.com)

This means many unpaid shipping invoices can potentially support an arrest.

But an ordinary commercial invoice unrelated to a recognized maritime claim cannot simply be converted into a ship-arrest claim because the debtor happens to own a vessel.

Unpaid Bunker Invoices

Bunker claims are among the most commercially important examples.

Article 1352 recognizes claims arising from goods, materials, provisions, bunkers, equipment and similar supplies provided for the operation, management, preservation or maintenance of a vessel.

Therefore, an unpaid bunker invoice may potentially constitute a maritime claim supporting arrest.

However, another question immediately arises:

Who ordered the bunkers and who is legally responsible for paying for them?

Current Turkish shipping guidance notes that although bunker supply can constitute a maritime claim, the owner’s liability must still be assessed. Where bunkers were ordered by a charterer rather than the owner, arresting the owner’s vessel can become significantly more complicated. (Global Practice Guides)

Charterer Ordered the Bunkers

This is one of the most difficult areas for foreign bunker suppliers.

Suppose a time charterer orders USD 450,000 of bunkers.

The supplier delivers the fuel to the vessel.

The charterer fails to pay.

The supplier then seeks to arrest the vessel owned by an entirely different company.

The existence of a bunker invoice does not automatically establish personal liability of the registered owner.

Under Turkish law, the relationship between the maritime claim, the person liable for the debt and ownership or demise charter status of the vessel must be examined under Article 1369 and related provisions. (DergiPark)

The contractual chain should therefore be investigated immediately.

Ship Repair Invoices

Unpaid repair invoices may also constitute maritime claims.

A repair yard that has carried out substantial work on a vessel may potentially seek security through ship arrest where the statutory conditions are satisfied.

The creditor should preserve the repair contract, quotations, work orders, completion documents, invoices, correspondence and evidence demonstrating that the services were actually performed on the vessel.

Where repairs were authorized through managers, agents or charterers, authority and liability should also be examined.

Ship Supply Invoices

Foreign suppliers may provide spare parts, provisions, lubricants, technical equipment or other goods necessary for vessel operation.

These claims can potentially fall within Article 1352.

The creditor should establish precisely:

what was supplied,

to which vessel,

when delivery occurred,

who ordered it,

who accepted delivery,

and who is contractually liable for payment.

The vessel name and IMO number should appear clearly throughout the documentary file where possible.

Port and Harbour Charges

Claims involving port, canal, dock, harbour and similar dues can also fall within recognized maritime-claim categories.

These claims can be particularly urgent because the vessel may be preparing to depart immediately after completing port operations.

The creditor should therefore avoid waiting until ordinary payment reminders have failed for several weeks if there is a genuine risk that the vessel will leave the jurisdiction.

Towage and Pilotage Claims

Unpaid towage and pilotage services are also recognized categories of maritime claims.

A creditor providing these services should preserve service orders, vessel records, invoices and evidence of performance.

Where the debt remains unpaid and the vessel is physically within Turkish jurisdiction, arrest may potentially provide effective security.

Agency Fees and Disbursements

Ship agents frequently pay substantial expenses on behalf of owners or vessels.

Article 1352 also encompasses certain ship-related disbursements and commission, brokerage or agency fees payable in respect of the ship.

The precise debtor relationship remains important.

The agent should therefore maintain clear records demonstrating which expenses were incurred, whose account they were incurred for and how they relate to the vessel. (timdrayton.com)

Crew Wage Claims

Crew wage claims receive special protection under maritime law.

Claims arising from employment on the vessel can constitute maritime claims and may also enjoy maritime-lien status where statutory requirements are satisfied.

An important procedural distinction is that the standard counter-security normally required from an arrest applicant does not apply in the same way to qualifying crew claims. Current Turkish shipping practice identifies crew claims as an exception to the standard SDR 10,000 counter-security requirement. (Global Practice Guides)

Freight and Charterparty Claims

Disputes arising from charterparties and carriage contracts may also qualify as maritime claims.

Examples can include unpaid hire, freight or other amounts arising directly from the relevant maritime contract.

The creditor must distinguish between the substantive claim against the debtor and the separate requirements for arresting a particular vessel.

Not every maritime claim allows every vessel associated with the debtor to be arrested.

Cargo Claims

Loss or damage to goods carried aboard a vessel can also constitute a maritime claim.

Cargo insurers acting through subrogation may therefore become maritime creditors.

The claimant should preserve the bill of lading, survey reports, cargo documentation, notices of loss and evidence concerning the amount of the claim.

The correct defendant and vessel-arrest requirements must then be analyzed separately.

Ship Sale Disputes

Article 1352 also recognizes disputes arising from contracts for the sale of ships as maritime claims. (timdrayton.com)

A foreign buyer that paid money for a vessel but becomes involved in a serious sale dispute may therefore need to investigate whether arrest is available.

The exact remedy depends on the contractual claim and circumstances.

An Ordinary Commercial Debt Is Not Enough

Suppose Company A owes a foreign creditor EUR 1 million under an unrelated consultancy contract.

Company A also happens to own a ship currently calling at Istanbul.

The creditor cannot automatically arrest that vessel merely because the debtor owns it.

Article 1353 provides that ship arrest cannot be ordered for claims other than maritime claims. (timdrayton.com)

The creditor may have other enforcement or interim-protection remedies against the debtor’s assets, but the special maritime arrest mechanism cannot simply be used for an ordinary non-maritime debt.

Foreign-Flagged Ships Can Be Arrested in Turkey

The fact that a vessel is foreign-flagged does not by itself prevent arrest in Turkey.

The Turkish Commercial Code specifically regulates jurisdiction over foreign-flagged vessels.

Under Article 1355, a Turkish arrest order concerning a foreign-flagged vessel may be issued by the court at the place where the ship is anchored, moored, alongside or laid on the stocks. (timdrayton.com)

This makes the vessel’s actual physical location extremely important.

Timing Is Critical

Ships move.

That simple fact makes maritime arrest fundamentally different from ordinary debt collection.

A vessel may arrive at a Turkish port at 06:00, complete cargo operations and depart the following night.

A creditor that waits several days to organize documents may lose the immediate arrest opportunity.

Foreign creditors should therefore begin preparing before the vessel arrives whenever its itinerary is known.

Identify the Vessel Correctly

The arrest application must target the correct vessel.

The creditor should confirm the vessel’s:

name,

IMO number,

flag,

registered owner,

and current location.

The IMO number is particularly useful because vessel names and flags can change.

Arresting the wrong vessel can expose the claimant to serious legal and financial consequences.

Identify the Registered Owner

This is one of the most important steps.

The company appearing on the unpaid invoice may not be the registered shipowner.

The contractual counterparty might instead be a charterer, manager, operator or intermediary.

Article 1369 establishes specific conditions concerning which vessel may be arrested and the relationship between the liable party and the vessel.

As a general principle, owner or demise-charterer liability can be important, subject to exceptions including maritime liens. (Global Practice Guides)

Maritime Claim Is Not the Same as Maritime Lien

These concepts should not be confused.

A maritime claim is a claim falling within the categories allowing ship arrest under Article 1352.

A maritime lien is a stronger proprietary security right recognized for specified categories of maritime claims.

Not every maritime claim creates a maritime lien.

This distinction becomes particularly important when ownership changes or when the contractual debtor is not the registered owner.

Maritime Liens Can Follow the Vessel

Certain maritime liens can follow a vessel despite changes in ownership, registration or flag.

This gives qualifying maritime-lien creditors stronger protection than ordinary unsecured maritime creditors.

The Turkish Commercial Code’s arrest framework expressly recognizes maritime-lien claims as an exception relevant to Article 1369’s ownership and liability analysis. (DergiPark)

The creditor should therefore determine whether it merely has a maritime claim or additionally enjoys maritime-lien status.

Evidence Required for Arrest

The claimant must provide sufficient evidence to persuade the court on a prima facie basis that the receivable constitutes a maritime claim and establish the amount claimed.

Current Turkish practice does not necessarily require original documents at the initial arrest stage, although the evidentiary file must still be persuasive. (Global Practice Guides)

Typical evidence can include the underlying contract, invoice, purchase order, delivery receipt, bunker delivery note, repair report, charterparty, bill of lading, account statement and correspondence acknowledging the debt.

Unpaid Invoice Alone May Be Insufficient

An invoice is important evidence, but it may not establish every element of the claim.

Suppose a foreign supplier submits a USD 700,000 invoice for marine equipment.

The shipowner responds:

“We never ordered those goods.”

The court must then consider evidence connecting the supply to the vessel and debtor.

Delivery documents, correspondence, signed receipts and purchase orders can therefore be much more persuasive than the invoice alone.

Bunker Delivery Note

For bunker claims, the bunker delivery note can be particularly important.

It can help establish that fuel was physically delivered to the identified vessel.

However, delivery does not necessarily establish who is contractually liable for payment.

The creditor must therefore preserve both delivery evidence and the contractual ordering chain.

Emails and Debt Acknowledgments

Correspondence can materially strengthen the application.

Suppose the shipowner writes:

“We confirm the USD 280,000 balance and expect payment to be made next Friday.”

That communication can become valuable evidence concerning both the existence and amount of the debt.

Foreign creditors should preserve original electronic communications rather than relying solely on screenshots.

Foreign Documents and Turkish Translation

Foreign creditors should anticipate translation requirements.

Documents submitted to Turkish courts generally need appropriate Turkish translations.

Current ship-arrest practice also requires appropriate power-of-attorney formalities for foreign claimants, with notarization and apostille requirements potentially applying to powers issued abroad. (Global Practice Guides)

These formalities should be prepared before the vessel arrives whenever possible.

Counter-Security for Vessel Arrest

A foreign creditor seeking arrest should plan for counter-security.

Current Turkish ship-arrest practice generally requires the applicant, except in qualifying crew cases, to provide SDR 10,000 as counter-security when requesting arrest. The court may increase or decrease that amount depending on the circumstances and requests of the parties. (Global Practice Guides)

Foreign creditors should therefore arrange the security in advance rather than discovering the requirement after the vessel is preparing to sail.

Why Is Counter-Security Required?

Ship arrest can cause enormous losses.

If a creditor wrongfully arrests a commercial vessel, the owner may suffer lost hire, port expenses, contractual penalties and disruption of future fixtures.

Counter-security provides protection against potential losses resulting from an unjustified arrest.

The creditor should therefore treat an arrest application as a serious interim remedy, not simply a pressure tactic.

Arrest Should Not Be Used as Commercial Blackmail

A creditor should never attempt to arrest a vessel without a genuine legal basis simply to force settlement of a disputed ordinary debt.

Wrongful arrest can expose the claimant to liability.

Before applying, counsel should verify:

the maritime nature of the claim,

the liable party,

ownership of the vessel,

Article 1369 requirements,

jurisdiction,

and evidence supporting the amount claimed.

Can the Application Be Made Without Warning the Shipowner?

Ship-arrest applications are commonly pursued urgently because advance notice may allow the vessel to depart.

The procedural strategy therefore focuses on obtaining effective security before the asset leaves the jurisdiction.

Whether an application can and should proceed without prior notice depends on the procedural circumstances.

The creditor should avoid sending unnecessary warnings where departure is imminent unless notice is legally or strategically required.

What Happens After the Arrest Order?

Once an arrest order is obtained, it must be implemented through the appropriate Turkish enforcement process.

The vessel is prevented from leaving while the arrest remains effective.

The practical objective is usually not to keep the ship immobilized indefinitely.

The objective is to obtain adequate security for the maritime claim.

Owner Offers Security

A shipowner may respond immediately by offering security in exchange for release of the vessel.

This is common in international shipping.

From the creditor’s perspective, obtaining reliable security can be commercially preferable to keeping the ship arrested.

The important questions are:

How much security is offered?

Who provides it?

Is it unconditional?

Where can it be enforced?

When does it expire?

Does it cover interest and costs?

Release Against Security

An arrested vessel can be released where adequate security is provided.

Current Turkish practice indicates that the amount is determined by the court and is commonly around 115% of the claim, subject to the vessel’s value and the circumstances. Security may be provided through cash or an unconditional, unlimited-duration Turkish bank guarantee. Other forms, such as a P&I letter of undertaking or foreign bank guarantee, can potentially be accepted where the parties agree. (Global Practice Guides)

The creditor should examine the wording before consenting to release.

P&I Club Letter of Undertaking

A reputable P&I Club may offer a Letter of Undertaking to secure the claim.

This can allow the vessel to resume commercial operations while preserving security for the dispute.

The creditor should examine the identity of the issuing club, amount, governing law, jurisdiction, covered claims and payment conditions.

Acceptance should not be automatic merely because the document is called an LOU.

Release Does Not Mean the Owner Admits Liability

Providing security to release an arrested vessel does not necessarily constitute an admission that the underlying claim is valid.

International ship-arrest principles expressly recognize that obtaining release against security should not be treated as acknowledgment of liability or waiver of defenses. ( Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi)

The substantive dispute can therefore continue after the vessel leaves.

Can a Sister Ship Be Arrested?

Potentially.

Turkish law recognizes sister-ship arrest in specified circumstances under Article 1369.

Current Turkish shipping guidance confirms that Article 1369(2) permits sister-ship arrest subject to statutory requirements. (Global Practice Guides)

This can be particularly valuable where the vessel connected directly with the claim has already left Turkey but another qualifying vessel owned by the relevant debtor enters Turkish waters.

Sister-Ship Arrest Is Not Unlimited

A creditor cannot simply arrest any vessel belonging to a corporate group.

Common management, branding or beneficial ownership allegations are not necessarily enough.

The statutory ownership and claim requirements must be satisfied.

Corporate structures in shipping frequently involve separate single-purpose companies owning individual vessels.

The legal owner of each vessel must therefore be verified carefully.

Can a Vessel Owned by an Affiliate Be Arrested?

Not automatically.

Suppose an international shipping group operates 30 vessels, each owned by a different special-purpose company.

A debt owed by Company A does not automatically permit arrest of a vessel legally owned by Company B merely because both companies belong to the same commercial group.

The creditor must establish the legal basis for arresting the particular ship.

What If the Vessel Has Changed Ownership?

A sale of the vessel can materially affect arrest rights.

For ordinary maritime claims, the relationship between the person liable when the claim arose and ownership at the time of arrest is important under Article 1369.

Maritime-lien claims can receive different treatment because qualifying liens may follow the vessel.

This is why the creditor should check both historical and current ownership.

Arrest of a Foreign Vessel at a Turkish Port

Suppose a Panama-flagged bulk carrier enters a Turkish port.

A foreign repair company has an unpaid USD 850,000 repair invoice relating to the vessel.

If the debt qualifies as a maritime claim and the statutory requirements are satisfied, the foreign creditor may potentially apply to the competent Turkish court for arrest while the vessel is physically within the relevant jurisdiction.

Article 1355 ties jurisdiction over foreign-flagged vessels to the place where the vessel is physically anchored, moored, alongside or laid on the stocks. (timdrayton.com)

Speed is therefore essential.

What If the Vessel Is Sailing Toward Turkey?

This is the ideal time to prepare.

The creditor can collect contracts, invoices, delivery evidence, translations, corporate documents and power-of-attorney materials before arrival.

The vessel’s itinerary can then be monitored through lawful commercial sources.

Once the vessel reaches the relevant Turkish jurisdiction, counsel can evaluate whether the arrest application is ready to be filed.

Waiting until after arrival wastes valuable time.

What If the Vessel Leaves Turkey?

If the vessel leaves before arrest is implemented, the immediate Turkish ship-arrest opportunity may disappear.

The creditor must then investigate other assets, another qualifying vessel or future calls by the relevant ship.

This is why maritime creditors frequently prepare the arrest file before the vessel reaches port.

Does Arrest Automatically Mean the Creditor Gets Paid?

No.

Ship arrest is primarily a security measure.

It secures the creditor’s position while the substantive claim is pursued through the appropriate proceedings.

The underlying dispute may ultimately be determined by Turkish courts, foreign courts or arbitration depending on the contract and jurisdictional framework.

The creditor must therefore distinguish between:

obtaining security

and

winning the underlying claim.

Arbitration Clause in the Contract

A bunker supply contract, charterparty, repair agreement or other maritime contract may contain an arbitration clause.

That does not necessarily make Turkish arrest irrelevant.

The creditor may potentially seek security in Turkey while the merits of the dispute are determined in arbitration, subject to applicable rules.

The arbitration clause should therefore be reviewed together with the arrest strategy.

Foreign Court Jurisdiction Clause

Similarly, the substantive dispute may belong before a foreign court.

The vessel’s temporary presence in Turkey may nevertheless create an opportunity to obtain security where Turkish ship-arrest requirements are satisfied.

The interaction between the Turkish security proceeding and foreign merits proceedings should be planned carefully.

Deadline for Main Proceedings

An arrest order is not the end of the case.

Turkish procedural law imposes requirements concerning commencement or continuation of the underlying enforcement or merits proceedings following provisional arrest.

The applicable deadline and procedure should be identified immediately after obtaining the arrest order.

Missing the relevant procedural step can endanger the security obtained.

Wrongful Vessel Arrest

Foreign creditors should take wrongful arrest risk seriously.

Suppose a bunker supplier arrests a vessel for USD 600,000.

It later becomes clear that the invoice was owed solely by an unrelated charterer and there was no legal basis for arresting the owner’s vessel.

The owner may seek compensation for losses caused by the wrongful arrest.

A creditor should therefore never treat the ship’s presence in Turkey as sufficient by itself.

Evidence of Loss From Wrongful Arrest

Commercial ships can generate substantial daily costs.

A wrongful arrest may allegedly cause lost hire, additional port expenses, delayed cargo, missed fixtures and other losses.

The arresting creditor should therefore understand the economic consequences of the remedy before filing.

This is one reason Turkish law requires counter-security.

Can the Creditor Arrest Other Assets Instead?

If the claim does not qualify as a maritime claim, or if arresting the vessel is not legally available, the creditor may investigate other assets belonging to the debtor.

Depending on the circumstances and procedural requirements, bank accounts, receivables, real estate, vehicles or other assets may potentially become enforcement targets.

Article 1353’s restriction concerns use of the special vessel-arrest mechanism for non-maritime claims; it does not mean an ordinary creditor loses every remedy against the debtor. (Global Practice Guides)

Practical Example: USD 750,000 Bunker Invoice

Assume a foreign bunker supplier delivers USD 750,000 of fuel to a vessel.

The invoice becomes due but remains unpaid.

The vessel is scheduled to arrive at a Turkish port within four days.

The supplier should immediately determine who ordered the bunkers, who is contractually liable, who owned the vessel when the claim arose and who owns it now.

The supply contract, bunker confirmation, BDN, invoice and correspondence should be assembled.

The creditor should then determine whether the claim satisfies Article 1352 and whether Article 1369 permits arrest of that particular vessel.

Foreign documents should be prepared for Turkish proceedings, the necessary power of attorney should be arranged and counter-security should be planned.

If the statutory requirements are met, an application can then be considered once the vessel is within the competent Turkish jurisdiction.

The key is not to begin legal preparation after the ship has completed loading and requested sailing clearance.

Practical Example: Ship Repair Company

Assume a foreign shipowner sends a vessel to a repair yard.

Repairs worth EUR 1.4 million are completed, but payment is not made.

Months later, the creditor learns that the vessel will call at a Turkish port.

Because repair claims can fall within Article 1352’s maritime-claim categories, the creditor may investigate arrest.

But the repair company must still establish the claim, identify the liable party, confirm vessel ownership and satisfy the other statutory conditions.

A strong repair invoice combined with work orders, completion certificates and written acknowledgment of debt can provide a much stronger arrest file than an invoice standing alone.

Emergency Checklist for Foreign Maritime Creditors

Where a vessel connected with an unpaid invoice is approaching or already located in Turkey, the creditor should act immediately:

1. Confirm the vessel’s name, IMO number, flag, registered owner and current Turkish location.
2. Determine whether the underlying invoice qualifies as a maritime claim under Article 1352.
3. Identify exactly who is legally liable for the debt: owner, demise charterer, time charterer, manager or another party.
4. Check Article 1369 requirements for arresting the particular vessel.
5. Collect the contract, invoices, delivery documents and acknowledgment of debt.
6. Prepare Turkish translations and foreign corporate/PoA documentation.
7. Arrange the required counter-security.
8. Identify the competent Turkish court based on the vessel’s location.
9. Prepare the arrest application before departure becomes imminent.
10. Plan the underlying litigation, arbitration or enforcement proceeding and the strategy for security offered in exchange for release.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a foreign creditor arrest a ship in Turkey for an unpaid invoice?

Potentially, but only where the underlying debt qualifies as a maritime claim and the statutory arrest requirements are satisfied.

Does every shipping invoice qualify?

No. Article 1352 contains a defined list of maritime claims, and Article 1353 prevents use of ship arrest for claims falling outside that framework. (timdrayton.com)

Can a vessel be arrested for unpaid bunkers?

Potentially. Bunker supplies can constitute a maritime claim, but liability of the owner or other relevant party must also be examined. (Global Practice Guides)

Can a ship be arrested for unpaid repair invoices?

Potentially, where the repair claim and other statutory requirements satisfy the Turkish ship-arrest regime.

Can a foreign-flagged vessel be arrested?

Yes. Article 1355 expressly regulates Turkish jurisdiction for arrest of foreign-flagged vessels physically located within the relevant Turkish jurisdiction. (timdrayton.com)

Is counter-security required?

Generally yes. Current Turkish practice ordinarily requires SDR 10,000, except for qualifying crew claims, although the court may adjust the amount. (Global Practice Guides)

Can a sister ship be arrested?

Potentially. Article 1369 permits sister-ship arrest in specified circumstances. (Global Practice Guides)

Can any vessel belonging to the same shipping group be arrested?

No. Group affiliation alone does not automatically satisfy the statutory requirements.

Can the vessel be released by providing security?

Yes. Adequate security can permit release while the substantive dispute continues. The court determines the required security where the parties do not agree. (Global Practice Guides)

Does providing security mean the shipowner admits the debt?

No. Release against security does not by itself amount to an acknowledgment of liability or waiver of defenses. ( Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi)

Emergency Vessel Arrest Assistance for Foreign Creditors in Turkey

For foreign maritime creditors, vessel arrest is primarily about timing and security.

An unpaid USD 1 million invoice may be difficult to collect after a vessel disappears into international trading routes. The same claim can look very different when a qualifying vessel is physically present at a Turkish port and a legally valid arrest application is ready.

However, Turkish law does not allow vessel arrest simply because a creditor is owed money. The creditor must first establish a maritime claim under Article 1352, and the conditions governing which vessel can be arrested under Article 1369 must also be satisfied. (timdrayton.com)

For foreign creditors, the most important preparation is therefore completed before the vessel arrives: identify the correct debtor and vessel, establish the maritime nature of the claim, collect supporting documents, prepare Turkish translations and authorization documents, arrange counter-security and determine the competent court.

If security is provided after arrest, the creditor must then evaluate whether the proposed bank guarantee, cash security, P&I Club Letter of Undertaking or other arrangement adequately protects principal, interest and costs before agreeing to release.

Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign bunker suppliers, ship repair companies, ship suppliers, agents, charterers, cargo interests and other maritime creditors with vessel arrest in Turkey, unpaid maritime invoices, bunker claims, ship repair debts, maritime claims, sister-ship arrest, counter-security, release against security, maritime debt recovery, enforcement and international shipping disputes.

Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No: 221, Yıldırım Tower, Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey