Learn how preliminary injunctions work in Turkish commercial disputes, including asset protection, emergency court orders, ex parte applications, provisional attachment, evidence requirements, security deposits and remedies for foreign companies.

Winning a commercial lawsuit may have little practical value if the defendant transfers the disputed property, disposes of important assets, changes corporate records, continues infringing intellectual property rights or otherwise makes enforcement impossible while the case is pending.

This problem is particularly important for foreign companies involved in litigation in Turkey.

Commercial proceedings can take time. During that period, circumstances may change dramatically.

Turkish procedural law therefore provides temporary legal protection mechanisms that can be requested before a final judgment.

One of the most important is the preliminary injunction mechanism governed principally by Articles 389 and following of the Turkish Code of Civil Procedure.

Under Article 389, a preliminary injunction may be granted concerning the subject matter of a dispute where a change in the existing situation could make obtaining the right substantially more difficult or impossible, or where delay could cause serious harm.

For foreign investors, creditors and companies, understanding this remedy can make the difference between obtaining an enforceable commercial result and winning a judgment against an empty company.

What Is a Preliminary Injunction in Turkey?

A preliminary injunction is a temporary protective measure ordered by a court before the underlying dispute has been finally determined.

Its purpose is generally not to decide who ultimately wins.

Instead, it seeks to preserve rights or prevent serious harm while the court considers the main dispute.

For example, a foreign investor may claim ownership of valuable shares while the opposing party attempts to transfer them to a third party.

Waiting until the final judgment could make the litigation practically meaningless.

An interim order may therefore become essential.

The Legal Basis: Article 389

Article 389 of the Turkish Code of Civil Procedure establishes the basic conditions.

A court may grant protection where changes in the current circumstances could make realization of the claimed right substantially more difficult or impossible or where delay creates a risk of serious damage. (Kanun Yolu)

The applicant therefore needs more than a general statement that litigation involves financial risk.

There must be a genuine need for temporary protection.

Preliminary Injunction Is Not the Same as Provisional Attachment

This distinction is extremely important in commercial disputes.

Foreign companies frequently say:

“We want to freeze the defendant’s assets.”

But the appropriate Turkish remedy may be either a preliminary injunction or provisional attachment, depending on the claim.

Provisional attachment is specifically important for monetary receivables.

Article 257 of the Turkish Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law provides, in principle, that a creditor holding an unsecured due monetary claim may seek provisional attachment over the debtor’s movable and immovable assets, receivables and other rights. (LEXPERA)

The correct remedy should therefore be identified before filing.

Preliminary Injunction Versus Provisional Attachment

A simplified distinction is:

Preliminary injunction: generally protects the subject matter of the dispute or prevents harmful changes affecting the disputed right.

Provisional attachment: principally protects the future collection of qualifying monetary receivables.

Confusing these mechanisms can lead to rejection of an otherwise commercially urgent application.

Example: Unpaid EUR 2 Million Invoice

A foreign supplier has a EUR 2 million overdue commercial receivable against a Turkish company.

The supplier learns that the debtor is rapidly disposing of assets.

If the objective is to secure eventual collection of the monetary debt, provisional attachment may be the more appropriate mechanism.

Article 257 specifically regulates provisional attachment for qualifying monetary claims. (LEXPERA)

Example: Disputed Company Shares

A foreign investor claims that shares in a Turkish company belong to it.

The opposing shareholder attempts to transfer those exact shares to a third party.

Here the objective is not simply collection of money.

The investor may seek an interim measure preventing transfer or otherwise preserving the disputed rights while the ownership dispute continues.

Example: Commercial Real Estate

A foreign company claims rights concerning valuable commercial property.

The counterparty attempts to sell or encumber the property before judgment.

Depending on the nature of the underlying claim, an interim measure concerning the disputed property may become critical.

Example: Intellectual Property

A company discovers that a competitor continues using allegedly infringing branding or other protected commercial material.

Allowing the conduct to continue for several years until final judgment could cause substantial commercial harm.

Temporary measures can therefore be especially important in intellectual property and unfair competition litigation.

Unfair Competition Cases

Turkish commercial law gives interim protection particular importance in unfair competition disputes.

Recent 2026 academic analysis notes that Article 61 of the Turkish Commercial Code contains specific interim-measure provisions for unfair competition cases and that these measures can be particularly important in preventing continuing competitive harm. (DergiPark)

Can an Injunction Be Requested Before Filing the Lawsuit?

Yes.

Article 390 provides that before the main action is filed, the application is made to the court that would have jurisdiction over the merits.

Once litigation has begun, the request is made to the court hearing the main case.

This is particularly useful in emergencies.

Emergency Applications Before Litigation

Suppose a foreign investor learns on Friday that disputed shares may be transferred on Monday.

Waiting to prepare an entire commercial lawsuit before requesting protection may create unnecessary risk.

Turkish procedural law allows an injunction request before the main action, subject to the applicable procedural requirements.

However, obtaining pre-action protection creates subsequent procedural obligations that must be followed carefully.

Can the Court Act Without Hearing the Defendant?

Potentially, yes.

Article 390 expressly allows the judge to grant the measure without hearing the opposing party where immediate protection of the applicant’s rights requires it.

This is extremely important where advance warning could defeat the purpose of the application.

Why Ex Parte Protection Matters

Consider a dispute involving a unique asset.

If the defendant receives several days’ advance notice that the claimant wants an order preventing transfer, the defendant might attempt to complete the transfer before the hearing.

In genuinely urgent circumstances, advance notice can therefore undermine effective protection.

Ex Parte Relief Is Not Automatic

A foreign company should not assume that simply requesting secrecy will result in an immediate order.

The applicant must demonstrate why protection cannot safely wait until the opposing party is heard.

The urgency should be supported by evidence.

Approximate Proof

Article 390 requires the applicant to identify clearly the grounds and type of injunction sought and to establish its underlying entitlement through the applicable standard of approximate proof.

This is one of the most important concepts in interim litigation.

The applicant does not necessarily need to prove the entire main case to the final-judgment standard at this preliminary stage.

But unsupported allegations are not enough.

Evidence Is Critical

A strong application may include:

contracts,

invoices,

bank records,

corporate documents,

correspondence,

notices,

trade registry records,

property records,

expert material,

photographs,

or other documentary evidence.

The exact evidence depends on the dispute.

WhatsApp and Emails

Commercial correspondence can sometimes provide important evidence of urgency.

For example, a counterparty may write:

“We are transferring the shares tomorrow regardless of your objections.”

That communication could be highly relevant to an application seeking immediate preservation of the disputed shares.

Digital evidence should be preserved carefully.

Asset Transfer Evidence

Where asset dissipation is alleged, useful evidence might include:

recent sales,

new mortgages,

share transfers,

asset advertisements,

corporate restructuring,

transfers to affiliates,

or other objectively verifiable conduct.

Avoid vague allegations such as:

“We think the company may hide its assets.”

The application should explain why the risk is concrete.

What Orders Can the Court Make?

Article 391 gives courts flexibility concerning the type of measure.

The court may order preservation of property or rights, placement with a custodian, or measures requiring or prohibiting particular conduct where appropriate to remove the danger or prevent harm.

This flexibility makes injunctions useful across many types of commercial disputes.

Preventing Transfer

Depending on the underlying dispute, an applicant may seek restrictions designed to prevent disposition of the specific property or right at issue.

The request should be proportionate and closely connected to the dispute.

Preservation of Goods

Suppose ownership of EUR 5 million of industrial equipment is disputed.

If the equipment is likely to be removed, sold or altered, preservation measures may be requested.

The court may determine an appropriate method for safeguarding the property.

Custodian Arrangements

Article 391 expressly contemplates placing relevant property with a custodian as one possible protective measure.

This can be useful where leaving disputed property under one party’s unrestricted control would create unacceptable risk.

Orders to Do or Not Do Something

Interim protection is not limited to physically preserving property.

Article 391 allows measures involving the doing or refraining from doing specified acts where necessary to eliminate the risk or prevent damage.

This can be particularly important in corporate, intellectual property and unfair competition disputes.

Company Share Disputes

Foreign shareholders frequently face urgent disputes concerning:

share transfers,

general assembly decisions,

management changes,

capital increases,

corporate control,

and shareholder rights.

Where delay could fundamentally alter the disputed position, interim protection should be considered immediately.

Capital Increase Disputes

Suppose a foreign shareholder owns 40% of a Turkish company.

The majority attempts a disputed capital increase that could substantially dilute the foreign investor.

Waiting until final judgment may leave the corporate structure fundamentally changed.

The possibility of interim protection should therefore be evaluated before the relevant corporate steps become irreversible.

General Assembly Decisions

Where corporate resolutions are challenged, the availability and appropriate scope of interim measures depend on the nature of the dispute and relevant corporate-law provisions.

Foreign shareholders should act quickly because implementation may occur before litigation progresses.

Director Disputes

A shareholder dispute may involve attempts to change management, access bank accounts or dispose of company property.

An interim strategy should distinguish between protecting the company’s assets and merely restricting ordinary business activity.

Courts will consider proportionality.

Freezing All Company Operations Is Not Easy

A claimant should not assume that a commercial dispute justifies shutting down an entire company.

The requested measure should generally be tailored to the specific risk.

Overly broad applications can be rejected or narrowed.

Proportionality Matters

Suppose the dispute concerns machinery worth EUR 500,000.

Requesting restrictions over every asset of a EUR 100 million company may be disproportionate.

The requested protection should correspond to the disputed right and threatened harm.

Monetary Claims Require Special Care

For pure payment claims, applicants should carefully evaluate provisional attachment rather than trying to use a general injunction as a substitute.

Article 257 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law provides the specific provisional attachment framework for qualifying monetary receivables. (LEXPERA)

This distinction is one of the most important procedural issues in Turkish commercial asset-protection litigation.

Provisional Attachment for Commercial Debts

A foreign creditor seeking payment from a Turkish debtor may be particularly interested in provisional attachment.

For a due monetary debt that is not secured by pledge, Article 257 allows provisional attachment over the debtor’s movable and immovable assets, receivables and other rights. (LEXPERA)

This can provide substantial leverage before a final judgment.

What About a Debt That Is Not Yet Due?

Article 257 provides more limited circumstances for provisional attachment of unmatured claims.

These include situations where the debtor has no fixed domicile or where the debtor is preparing to conceal or remove assets, flee, or engage in fraudulent transactions prejudicing creditor rights in order to avoid obligations. (LEXPERA)

The facts must therefore be analyzed carefully.

Example: Debtor Selling Assets

A foreign company has supplied machinery on credit.

The Turkish buyer stops communicating.

The creditor discovers that the buyer is rapidly transferring valuable assets.

This may require immediate evaluation of provisional attachment and other enforcement measures rather than waiting for ordinary litigation to finish.

Bank Accounts

Where the statutory conditions for the relevant protective measure are satisfied, bank accounts and receivables can become important targets in enforcement strategy.

However, the applicant should distinguish between obtaining a court order and actually identifying recoverable assets.

Asset investigation should begin early.

Real Estate

A Turkish debtor may own factories, offices, land or other real estate.

Protective measures may be considered where statutory conditions exist.

Property records should be investigated before the debtor’s financial position deteriorates further.

Vehicles and Machinery

Movable assets may also be relevant.

But creditors should assess whether they are:

owned by the debtor,

leased,

pledged,

subject to third-party rights,

or already encumbered.

Nominal asset value does not necessarily equal recoverable value.

Receivables From Third Parties

A debtor may have valuable receivables against customers even if it owns little physical property.

Enforcement strategy should therefore consider the company’s entire asset structure.

Security From the Applicant

Interim measures can cause substantial harm if later found unjustified.

Turkish procedural law therefore includes mechanisms concerning security from the applicant.

Foreign companies should be prepared for the possibility that the court will require security before implementing the measure.

Why Security Is Required

Imagine that a court prevents the sale of a EUR 20 million asset.

Two years later, the claimant loses the case.

The defendant may argue that the injunction caused substantial losses.

Security helps address the risk associated with temporary protection granted before final adjudication.

Foreign Claimants

Foreign companies should evaluate security requirements at the beginning of the strategy.

The precise security position can depend on applicable procedural rules, international agreements and circumstances.

Do not wait until an emergency application is ready before considering how required security will be provided.

Wrongful Injunction Risk

An applicant can face consequences if interim protection proves unjustified and causes damage.

Therefore, preliminary injunctions should not be used merely to create commercial pressure.

The application should be legally grounded and proportionate.

Evidence Before Filing

A foreign claimant should ideally create an emergency evidence file containing:

Underlying contract

Corporate documents

Proof of the claimed right

Evidence of threatened action

Asset information

Relevant communications

Chronology

Requested measure

Explanation of urgency

This allows counsel to act quickly if circumstances deteriorate.

Speed Matters

Interim remedies are inherently time-sensitive.

If a claimant knows for six months that an asset is being transferred but waits until the transaction is completed, obtaining meaningful protection may become substantially harder.

Urgent legal remedies require urgent legal action.

Do Not Send a Warning Too Early

Sometimes commercial negotiations should continue.

But where there is genuine asset-dissipation risk, warning the opposing party that an injunction application is coming may defeat the purpose.

The communication strategy should therefore be coordinated with litigation strategy.

Settlement Negotiations

An injunction application does not necessarily eliminate settlement possibilities.

In fact, effective interim protection can stabilize the parties’ positions while negotiations continue.

But interim measures should not be abused solely as bargaining pressure.

Arbitration Agreements

Commercial contracts frequently contain arbitration clauses.

Foreign companies should determine whether interim protection should be requested from:

a Turkish court,

the arbitral tribunal,

or an emergency arbitrator,

depending on the arbitration agreement, seat, institutional rules and applicable law.

This analysis should occur immediately when the dispute arises.

Emergency Arbitration

Some institutional arbitration rules permit emergency arbitrator applications before the full tribunal is constituted.

Whether this mechanism is appropriate depends on the particular arbitration agreement and enforcement needs.

Court protection may still be relevant.

Turkish Assets and Foreign Arbitration

A contract may provide for arbitration abroad while the threatened assets are located in Turkey.

The foreign company should therefore consider how interim protection concerning Turkish assets can practically be obtained and implemented.

The location of the asset can be as important as the dispute-resolution clause.

Foreign Court Proceedings

Similarly, litigation pending abroad does not automatically protect assets located in Turkey.

A separate Turkish-law strategy may be required.

Cross-border litigants should coordinate proceedings rather than assume one country’s court order automatically operates everywhere.

Asset Investigation Before the Lawsuit

Before spending years litigating a major claim, ask:

What does the defendant own?

This question is particularly important for foreign companies.

A EUR 10 million judgment against a shell company with no assets may provide little economic value.

Corporate Structure Investigation

Determine whether the contracting party is actually the asset-owning company.

Multinational and Turkish corporate groups may operate through multiple affiliates.

A contract with “ABC Trading” does not automatically create a claim against “ABC Holding.”

Corporate identity matters.

Transfers to Related Companies

If assets have been transferred to shareholders, directors or affiliated companies, separate legal remedies may need to be considered.

An injunction cannot automatically treat every group company as the debtor.

The factual and legal basis for each claim must be established.

Fraudulent Asset Transfers

Where assets are deliberately transferred to frustrate creditors, Turkish enforcement law provides separate mechanisms that may become relevant.

The appropriate remedy depends on the transaction, timing and underlying debt.

Foreign creditors should investigate suspicious transfers promptly.

Injunction Against Third Parties

Requests affecting third-party rights require particular caution.

A court will consider the relationship between the requested measure and the actual dispute.

The applicant should identify the asset, right and legal basis precisely.

Protecting Evidence

Sometimes the immediate concern is not disappearance of money but disappearance of evidence.

Commercial litigation can involve digital records, accounting material, technical evidence or physical goods that may change over time.

Evidence-preservation mechanisms should therefore be considered separately from asset-protection measures.

Expert Examination

Where machinery, defective goods or construction work may change before trial, obtaining timely technical evidence can be crucial.

A later expert may be unable to reconstruct the original condition.

Asset protection and evidence preservation should therefore be coordinated.

Intellectual Property and Counterfeit Goods

Commercial disputes involving trademarks, designs, patents or counterfeit goods can require extremely rapid action.

If allegedly infringing goods continue entering the market during litigation, final damages may not adequately protect the rights holder.

Sector-specific interim remedies should be examined.

Unfair Competition

Unfair competition is another area where interim protection can be especially important.

A 2026 legal study emphasizes the distinct role of interim measures under Article 61 of the Turkish Commercial Code in unfair competition disputes. (DergiPark)

Potential disputes may involve misleading advertising, misuse of confidential commercial information or other continuing competitive conduct.

Trade Secrets

Suppose a former commercial partner possesses confidential manufacturing data and is about to disclose it to competitors.

Damages awarded years later may not restore secrecy.

Immediate preventive relief may therefore be considerably more valuable than eventual monetary compensation.

Distribution Agreements

Termination disputes can involve:

inventory,

customer databases,

trademarks,

confidential information,

and continued representation as an authorized distributor.

Temporary measures may become relevant where continued conduct threatens substantial harm.

Franchise Disputes

After termination, a former franchisee may continue using branding or confidential know-how.

Waiting for final judgment can cause ongoing brand damage.

The appropriate interim remedy should therefore be evaluated immediately.

M&A Disputes

Acquisition disputes frequently involve urgent issues concerning:

shares,

purchase-price funds,

escrow accounts,

management control,

corporate records,

and completion obligations.

The transaction documents should anticipate interim relief wherever possible.

Share Purchase Agreement Drafting

Foreign investors should not wait for a dispute before thinking about emergency remedies.

A well-drafted share purchase agreement should address:

governing law,

jurisdiction or arbitration,

notices,

asset preservation,

closing conduct,

and interim protection.

Litigation strategy begins during contract drafting.

Practical Example: Foreign Investor and Share Transfer

A foreign investor pays EUR 5 million toward acquisition of a Turkish company.

A dispute arises before closing.

The seller announces an intention to transfer the same shares to another purchaser.

The investor may need to seek immediate protection concerning the disputed shares rather than simply file a damages action.

Evidence of the transaction, payment and threatened transfer should be assembled immediately.

Practical Example: Foreign Supplier and Asset Dissipation

A foreign supplier has a EUR 3 million overdue claim.

The Turkish buyer begins selling its real estate and transferring funds.

Because the claim is monetary, counsel should analyze the conditions for provisional attachment under Article 257 rather than relying indiscriminately on a general preliminary injunction. (LEXPERA)

Practical Example: Joint Venture Dispute

A foreign shareholder owns 50% of a Turkish joint venture.

The relationship collapses.

The other shareholder allegedly attempts to transfer disputed corporate assets to related entities.

The foreign investor should determine whether the relevant rights belong to the shareholder personally or to the company, identify the specific transactions at risk and seek a proportionate form of temporary protection.

Corporate disputes require precise standing and remedy analysis.

Practical Example: Unfair Competition

A former distributor continues presenting itself as the foreign manufacturer’s authorized Turkish distributor after termination.

Customers are allegedly being redirected.

Because commercial harm may continue every day, interim protection can become more commercially valuable than damages awarded years later.

What Should Be Included in an Injunction Application?

A strong application should generally explain:

the underlying right,

the dispute,

the immediate risk,

the evidence,

why final judgment would come too late,

the exact measure requested,

and why that measure is proportionate.

Article 390 expressly requires the applicant to state the grounds and type of requested injunction clearly and establish its position through approximate proof.

Avoid Generic Requests

Do not simply request:

“Freeze everything the defendant owns.”

The application should identify the legal basis and appropriate remedy.

For a monetary receivable, provisional attachment may be required.

For disputed property, a tailored preliminary injunction may be appropriate.

Identify the Commercial Objective

Before filing, determine what actually needs protection.

Is the objective to:

prevent a share transfer?

preserve machinery?

stop trademark use?

secure a monetary claim?

prevent disposal of disputed real estate?

preserve evidence?

Different objectives require different procedural strategies.

Emergency Asset Protection Checklist

Before requesting protection in Turkey, examine:

Nature of claim → Subject matter → Monetary or non-monetary right → Immediate danger → Evidence → Asset location → Correct remedy → Competent court → Ex parte necessity → Security requirement → Exact requested order → Implementation → Main proceedings → Potential liability.

This analysis should happen as early as possible.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can a foreign company obtain a preliminary injunction in Turkey?

Potentially, yes. Foreign status does not by itself prevent a company from requesting temporary judicial protection where the relevant statutory conditions are satisfied.

2. Can an injunction be obtained before filing the main lawsuit?

Yes. Article 390 expressly allows a request before the main proceedings are commenced, subject to the applicable jurisdictional and procedural requirements.

3. Can the court issue an injunction without hearing the other party?

Yes, where immediate protection requires it. Article 390 allows a judge to act without first hearing the opposing party in appropriate circumstances.

4. Do I have to prove the entire case?

Not at the same level required for a final judgment. Article 390 applies an approximate-proof standard for the interim request.

5. Can a court prevent transfer of disputed property?

Potentially, depending on the nature of the dispute and requested measure. Article 391 gives courts flexibility to order measures necessary to preserve rights or prevent harm.

6. Can I freeze the defendant’s assets for an unpaid invoice?

For monetary claims, provisional attachment under the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law should be specifically evaluated. It should not automatically be treated as an ordinary preliminary injunction. (LEXPERA)

7. Can provisional attachment be requested for a debt that is not yet due?

Only in more limited statutory circumstances, including certain situations involving absence of a fixed domicile or conduct aimed at hiding or removing assets or otherwise frustrating creditors. (LEXPERA)

8. Will the court require security?

Security requirements can arise in temporary-protection proceedings. The amount and applicable exceptions should be evaluated according to the specific procedural mechanism and case.

9. Can preliminary injunctions be used in shareholder disputes?

Potentially, particularly where disputed shares, corporate rights or other subject matter could be irreversibly affected before judgment. The requested measure must be connected to the underlying dispute.

10. Should asset protection be considered before filing the commercial lawsuit?

Yes. Where dissipation or transfer risk exists, asset-protection strategy should be analyzed before the defendant has time to alter the factual situation.

Legal Assistance for Preliminary Injunctions and Asset Protection in Turkey

For foreign companies involved in Turkish commercial disputes, the most important question is not always:

“Can we win the lawsuit?”

Sometimes the more urgent question is:

“Will there still be anything meaningful to enforce when we win?”

Turkish procedural law provides powerful temporary protection mechanisms. Article 389 of the Turkish Code of Civil Procedure permits preliminary protection where changes in existing circumstances could make realization of the disputed right substantially more difficult or impossible or where delay could cause serious harm. Articles 390 and 391 regulate applications and the types of protective orders available.

For monetary claims, provisional attachment under Article 257 of the Turkish Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law must be separately considered. (LEXPERA)

Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office provides legal assistance to foreign investors, international companies, shareholders and commercial creditors concerning preliminary injunctions in Turkey, provisional attachment, asset protection, shareholder disputes, commercial debt recovery, company asset disputes, unfair competition, urgent commercial litigation and cross-border enforcement.

Legal assistance may include emergency review of asset-transfer risks, preparation of preliminary injunction applications, provisional attachment strategy, preservation of disputed company shares or commercial assets, coordination of interim protection with arbitration and representation in subsequent Turkish commercial proceedings.

Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile / WhatsApp: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Office: Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yildirim Tower, Balgat, Cankaya, Ankara, Turkey

For high-value commercial disputes, the safest principle is clear: do not wait for a final judgment to start thinking about asset protection. If shares, property, money or commercially critical rights can disappear while litigation is pending, temporary protection should be evaluated at the beginning of the dispute.