247 / 516
Decision of Joint Jurisprudence Declaring That the Lack of
Justification Shall Not Constitute Grounds for Denial of
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
*
Att. Leyla Orak
Introduction
There is a difference of jurisprudence between the 2. and 13. Civil
Chambers of the Court of Cassation whether enforcement of (final)
judgments which do not include any justification constitutes incompli-
ance with the
ordre public
. The Court of Cassation 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 num-
bered 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 represent-
ed in court or, a default judgment should not have been rendered
LAW OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
233
*
Article of September 2012