

A performance bond is called in Turkey against a foreign contractor. Learn about injunctions, unfair calls, bank guarantees, contract termination, evidence preservation, arbitration and emergency legal remedies.
A performance bond dispute can become an immediate financial crisis for a foreign contractor operating in Turkey. In construction, energy, infrastructure, industrial, supply and engineering projects, an employer may attempt to call a performance bond after alleging delay, defective performance, failure to achieve milestones, termination or another contractual breach. The contractor may strongly dispute those allegations, but once a demand reaches the issuing or guaranteeing bank, payment can move much faster than the underlying contractual dispute. The central legal question is therefore often not only whether the contractor ultimately breached the contract, but whether payment under the bond can be prevented before the money is transferred. Foreign contractors facing an imminent call should examine the bond wording, underlying contract, applicable law, dispute-resolution clause and available interim remedies immediately.
The commercial purpose of a performance bond is to provide the beneficiary with financial security if the contractor fails to perform its contractual obligations. However, disputes frequently arise where the beneficiary attempts to call the bond while the contractor maintains that contractual performance is continuing, delay was caused by the employer, an extension of time should have been granted, termination was unlawful or the conditions for calling the bond have not occurred.
The practical problem is timing. The underlying construction or commercial dispute may take months or years to resolve, while the guarantee may potentially be called and paid much earlier.
The bond itself should be reviewed before conclusions are drawn from the underlying contract. Determine the amount, beneficiary, issuing bank, expiry date, extension provisions, governing law, payment conditions and documents required for a valid demand.
A contractor should not assume that every performance bond operates identically.
This is often one of the most important questions. Many bank guarantees used in major commercial projects are structured so that the bank’s payment obligation is legally distinct from disputes arising under the underlying construction, supply or service contract.
If the instrument is independent, merely proving that the contractor disputes the employer’s breach allegation may not automatically prevent payment.
Some guarantees make payment dependent on specified documents, certifications or events. In such cases, the beneficiary’s demand should be compared carefully with the precise conditions contained in the guarantee.
A demand that does not comply with the instrument may create a materially different dispute from a compliant demand under an unconditional or on-demand guarantee.
If the beneficiary has already called the bond, obtain the complete demand delivered to the bank. Review its date, amount, signatures, statements and supporting documents.
Do not rely solely on a telephone notification from the project team or bank.
The contractor should immediately establish whether the bank has merely received a demand, approved the demand internally, scheduled payment or already transferred the funds.
The available emergency strategy can change dramatically depending on this timing.
Where there are serious legal grounds to challenge the demand, the contractor should communicate its position promptly. Relevant contractual and judicial steps should be coordinated rather than relying on informal requests asking the bank not to pay.
Potentially, depending on the nature of the guarantee, governing law, contractual structure, evidence and circumstances. Interim judicial protection may be sought where the applicable legal requirements are satisfied.
However, an injunction should never be treated as automatic merely because the contractor disputes the beneficiary’s allegations.
An injunction obtained after the guarantee has already been paid may no longer accomplish the contractor’s primary objective of preventing the transfer.
Foreign contractors should therefore establish an internal escalation procedure requiring immediate legal review whenever a beneficiary threatens to call a bond.
A contractor alleging that the beneficiary is abusing the guarantee should build a detailed evidentiary record. Relevant evidence can include project correspondence, progress certificates, employer instructions, extension-of-time requests, acceptance documents, completion records and notices showing the actual contractual position.
General statements that the call is “unfair” are rarely sufficient.
The beneficiary may allege contractor delay even though the project was affected by late site access, design changes, delayed approvals, additional works or other employer-caused events.
The contractor should reconstruct the project chronology immediately.
If contractual milestones were extended or should have been extended, preserve notices, revised schedules, correspondence and expert delay analysis.
The relationship between contractual delay and the guarantee call should be explained precisely.
Foreign contractors frequently perform additional or changed works while the parties disagree about price and time consequences.
A beneficiary should not automatically be allowed to characterize every delay arising from substantial variations as straightforward contractor default without examination of the contract and project history.
If the bond is called because of alleged defects, obtain inspection reports, test results, commissioning records, punch lists, photographs and expert evidence.
Determine whether the alleged defect exists, whether it is material and whether the contractor was contractually entitled to cure it.
Provisional acceptance, taking-over certificates, commissioning records and similar documents may materially affect the contractual dispute.
If the beneficiary accepted the works and later calls the full performance bond, the legal and contractual basis should be examined closely.
Some contracts require the performance security to decrease after completion of specified milestones.
If the beneficiary calls an amount exceeding the security that should properly remain outstanding, this issue should be raised immediately.
Determine whether the demand was made within the bond’s valid period and in accordance with any presentation requirements.
A demand made after expiry may raise fundamental enforceability issues.
Certain contracts require the contractor to extend a bond if completion is delayed. Failure to extend may itself entitle the beneficiary to make a demand under the contractual documents.
The contractor should therefore monitor expiry dates long before the final weeks of validity.
The bond cannot be analyzed commercially without understanding the underlying contract. Review provisions governing performance security, delay, defects, termination, notice, extension of time, liquidated damages and dispute resolution.
The objective is to determine why the beneficiary claims a right to call the security and whether that claim is supported by the contractual record.
Performance bond calls often follow termination. If termination itself is disputed, examine whether the required contractual grounds, cure notices and procedural steps existed.
An allegedly wrongful termination can become central to the wider damages dispute even where the guarantee has an independent legal character.
The contract may require notice and an opportunity to remedy default before termination or other remedies become available.
Determine whether the employer complied with those requirements.
Construction and infrastructure contracts frequently contain strict notice provisions. Review notices issued by both sides and identify whether contractual rights were properly reserved.
Emails, project-management systems, messaging applications, electronic approvals and digital schedules may contain critical evidence.
Foreign contractors should preserve project data before employees leave the project or access rights are terminated.
An internal message acknowledging a delay or technical problem should not be destroyed. Evidence should be preserved and evaluated in context.
Selective destruction can create serious litigation and evidentiary problems.
Complex performance disputes may require engineering, delay, quantity or financial expertise.
An expert can help explain whether the beneficiary’s stated reason for calling the bond corresponds with actual project performance.
Many international construction contracts provide for arbitration. Determine the seat, rules, governing law and available interim-measure mechanisms.
The existence of an arbitration clause does not mean the contractor should wait for the final arbitral award before considering urgent protection.
Depending on the agreed arbitration rules, emergency arbitrator procedures may potentially provide urgent interim relief before the tribunal is fully constituted.
Whether this is strategically appropriate depends on the arbitration agreement and circumstances.
Where the underlying dispute is subject to arbitration but the guarantee or bank relationship involves Turkey, jurisdiction and interim-relief strategy require careful analysis.
The contractor should avoid initiating inconsistent proceedings without understanding their interaction.
If arbitration is seated outside Turkey, determine how interim measures affecting a Turkish beneficiary, bank or assets can practically be implemented.
Procedural strategy should be developed before the guarantee payment becomes irreversible.
The dispute does not necessarily end. The contractor may still pursue claims arising from an allegedly wrongful call under the underlying contractual relationship or other applicable legal grounds.
However, the case shifts from preventing payment to recovering money and damages.
Preserve evidence showing the amount paid under the guarantee, bank charges, financing costs and other direct financial consequences.
If the call triggers cross-defaults or affects other financing arrangements, preserve those records as well.
A substantial bond call can reduce available credit lines and affect the contractor’s ability to obtain new guarantees.
This makes emergency management commercially important even beyond the amount of the individual bond.
International guarantee structures can involve a foreign bank issuing a counter-guarantee to a Turkish bank that issues the local performance bond.
The contractor should map the entire guarantee chain because payment obligations and available remedies may involve more than one institution and jurisdiction.
A parent company guarantee should not automatically be treated as equivalent to an independent bank guarantee.
Its wording, underlying obligations and governing law should be analyzed separately.
A project may include several forms of security, including performance bonds, advance payment guarantees and retention guarantees.
A dispute involving one security instrument should not automatically determine rights under another.
Potentially, depending on the contract, applicable law and facts. If the beneficiary had no contractual right to retain the proceeds, the contractor may pursue repayment and potentially additional provable losses.
Causation and evidence remain essential.
An employer may claim delay damages while also calling performance security. The contract should be examined to determine the relationship between those remedies and whether contractual limits apply.
A beneficiary may offer not to call the bond if the contractor signs a settlement, waiver or acknowledgment.
Any such document should be reviewed carefully because it may affect substantial claims concerning extensions, variations, defects or unpaid amounts.
Commercial negotiations can be useful, but they should not consume the period in which effective interim judicial protection could have been sought.
Negotiation and legal protection can often be managed in parallel.
If there is concern that funds paid under the guarantee could become difficult to recover, the beneficiary’s financial position may be relevant to the urgency and strategy of the dispute.
Performance securities issued for public procurement or public-sector projects may involve specific statutory and contractual rules. The legal regime should be identified before applying principles from a private construction contract.
International contractors operating in Turkey should maintain a centralized register containing every guarantee’s amount, bank, beneficiary, expiry date, reduction milestones, extension requirements and underlying contract.
This can prevent emergency disputes caused simply by poor internal monitoring.
The company should designate who must be notified when a beneficiary threatens a guarantee call. Legal, treasury, project management and senior management teams should receive the information immediately.
Waiting for the next ordinary management meeting may be too late.
When a foreign contractor learns that a performance bond may be called in Turkey, it should immediately obtain the bond and call demand, determine whether payment has occurred, identify the issuing and counter-guaranteeing banks, review the underlying contract, preserve project evidence, reconstruct the alleged default, examine expiry and call conditions, assess Turkish court or arbitral interim relief, notify relevant parties appropriately and protect contractual claims against the beneficiary.
Potentially, but it depends heavily on the guarantee wording, applicable law, circumstances and requirements for interim relief. A contractual disagreement alone should not be assumed to stop payment.
That depends on the nature and wording of the guarantee. Independent on-demand guarantees can operate differently from conditional guarantees.
Potentially, where the applicable legal requirements are satisfied. Timing is crucial because the practical objective may be lost once payment occurs.
The demand should be compared carefully with all documentary and timing requirements contained in the guarantee.
It can be highly relevant to the underlying contractual dispute and potentially to allegations that the call is abusive, depending on the guarantee structure and facts.
The contractor may still evaluate claims for recovery and damages against the beneficiary or other responsible parties, depending on the applicable legal and contractual framework.
Not necessarily in every situation. The arbitration agreement, seat, applicable procedural framework and type of interim relief sought should be examined carefully.
Potentially, where the applicable arbitration rules provide an emergency procedure and the circumstances satisfy the relevant requirements.
Negotiation may be useful, but it should not be allowed to consume the time available for effective interim protection where payment is imminent.
Obtain the exact performance bond and the beneficiary’s call demand immediately. The legal strategy depends on the wording of the security, the stage of payment and the evidence showing whether the call complies with the guarantee and underlying contractual framework.
Performance bond disputes can involve urgent injunction applications, bank guarantee calls, construction delays, wrongful termination, defects, extension-of-time claims, counter-guarantees, arbitration and substantial financial exposure. Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign contractors, international construction companies, engineering companies and investors facing performance security disputes in Turkey. Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya provides legal assistance in reviewing guarantee calls, preparing emergency legal remedies, coordinating contractual and technical evidence, handling arbitration-related interim measures and pursuing claims arising from allegedly wrongful performance bond calls.
Phone: +90 312 434 22 22
Mobile / WhatsApp: +90 532 769 22 22
Email: info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address: Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yıldırım Tower, Office No:148, 06520 Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey