Action for Annulment of Objection in Türkiye: Deadline and Court

Economic pressure in recent years has led to more disputes between creditors and debtors in Türkiye. Creditors who can’t collect on time increasingly turn to enforcement proceedings (icra takibi).

But if the debtor objects to non-judgment enforcement proceedings (ilamsız takip), the proceedings stop. Whether the objection is justified is not examined at that stage.

One of the legal routes available to a creditor who wants to continue is the action for annulment of objection (itirazın iptali davası).

So what is it, when and where is it filed, and what are the consequences for each side?

What Is the Action for Annulment of Objection?

It is regulated in Article 67 of the Turkish Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (İcra ve İflas Kanunu, İİK).

A creditor whose non-judgment enforcement proceedings were stopped by a timely objection can file a lawsuit under general provisions, prove the existence of the claim and ask the court to annul the objection.

The key point: the court does not only check whether the objection was justified. Whether the claim actually exists is also part of the trial.

What Is the Deadline?

The creditor must file within one year of the objection being served on them. This is a strict limitation period (hak düşürücü süre) under Art. 67.

Missing the deadline does not extinguish the debt itself. But the creditor can no longer continue the same enforcement proceedings by having the objection annulled.

In practice, track not only when the debtor objected but when the objection was served on the creditor.

Which Court Is Competent?

Although the action arises from enforcement proceedings, it is not heard by the enforcement court.

The competent court depends on the legal relationship behind the claim. It may be the civil court of first instance, the commercial court, the civil court of peace, the consumer court or the labour court.

This distinguishes it from removal of objection (itirazın kaldırılması), which is requested from the enforcement court. Annulment of objection is a lawsuit before the competent ordinary court.

Mandatory mediation and the deadline

Depending on the dispute, mandatory mediation may be required before filing.

If mediation is pursued, the one-year period is suspended. Once mediation ends, the period resumes where it left off. Time spent in mediation does not run against the creditor.

Proving the Claim

Starting enforcement does not in itself prove that the claim exists.

The creditor must prove it under general rules of evidence. Contracts, invoices, bank records, commercial books, current account records and other evidence become decisive.

The debtor, in turn, may argue that the debt never arose, was paid, ended, or that the amount is wrong.

So before starting enforcement, ask not only “am I owed this?” but “how will I prove it if I have to?”

Compensation Depending on the Outcome

The consequences go beyond whether enforcement continues. Compensation may also apply.

Enforcement denial compensation

If the action succeeds and the debtor’s objection is found unjustified, the court may award enforcement denial compensation (icra inkâr tazminatı) against the debtor, provided the conditions are met and the creditor requests it.

Whether the claim is liquid matters here. Winning the case alone is not sufficient.

Bad faith compensation

If the action is dismissed, compensation may be awarded in the debtor’s favour. If the creditor acted in bad faith in starting enforcement and the debtor requests it, bad faith compensation (kötü niyet tazminatı) may be awarded against the creditor.

The difference is important. Enforcement denial compensation does not require the debtor’s bad faith. Bad faith compensation does require the creditor’s bad faith. A dismissed case alone does not prove the creditor acted in bad faith.

In both cases a request is required. The court does not award compensation on its own motion.

Practical Points

First, watch the one-year deadline. Don’t confuse the date you learned of the objection with the date it was served.

Second, annulment of objection and removal of objection are different routes. Both aim to continue stalled proceedings, but the forum, deadline and scope of review differ.

Finally, compensation is not an automatic result of winning or losing. The nature of the claim, whether it is liquid, and the parties’ intentions are decisive.

In Summary

At first glance, the action simply restarts stalled enforcement. In practice, every dispute needs its own legal assessment.

The underlying relationship, how the claim is proven, the deadline, the competent court, procedural requirements and compensation all depend on the facts. Choices made when starting enforcement directly affect the later lawsuit.

That is why the process is best handled as a whole, from the moment enforcement begins.

If you need Legal Advisory support with debt collection or a contested enforcement file in Türkiye, write to us.