Process in Turkish Execution Law: Procedures, Pitfalls, and Compliance.

Istanbul Attorneys
Dec 10, 2025
19 min read

Yellow PTT notification envelope stamped with T.C. Courts seal lying on a doorstep, signaling the start of Turkish enforcement proceedings.

1. Introduction: The Critical Role of Notification in Turkish Law

For international investors and legal practitioners operating in Turkey, understanding "Tebligat" (Notification) is the single most critical procedural hurdle in debt recovery and litigation. In the context of Turkish Execution and Bankruptcy Law (İcra ve İflas Kanunu - İİK), notification is not merely the act of informing a party; it is a strict formal procedure essential for the validity of legal proceedings.

1.1. Defining "Tebligat" (Notification)

Under Turkish jurisprudence, notification is defined as the act of documenting a legal transaction by an authorized authority, in accordance with the law and procedure, to bring it to the knowledge of the relevant person (addressee) via writing or announcement.

It is crucial to distinguish between "communication" and "notification." Notification is a certification operation (belgeleme işlemi). It serves two primary purposes:

Information: Ensuring the addressee is aware of the legal action.
Documentation: Providing official proof that the information was delivered in compliance with the law.

1.2. The Statutory Framework

The procedural rules regarding notification in execution and bankruptcy matters are governed by a specific hierarchy of laws. While the primary context is the Execution and Bankruptcy Law (İİK), the procedural mechanics are borrowed from the general Notification Law.

Primary Legislation: Notification rules are found in Articles 21 and 57 of the İİK.
The Reference Rule: Both Article 21 and Article 57 of the İİK explicitly state that notifications related to execution must be conducted in accordance with the Notification Law No. 7201 (Tebligat Kanunu).
Regulatory Layer: The implementation is further governed by the Regulation on the Implementation of the Notification Law and the Electronic Notification Regulation (issued pursuant to Art. 7/a of the Notification Law).
Historical Note: Practitioners reviewing older case law (Yargıtay decisions) must be aware that the "Notification Bylaw" (Tebligat Tüzüğü), frequently cited in older texts, was abolished on August 7, 2012. However, understanding references to it remains relevant for interpreting established jurisprudence.

1.3. Why Notification is the "Sine Qua Non" of Execution

In Turkish execution law, notification carries immense weight. It is a constitutive element of the proceedings.

Validity of Proceedings: Many legal transactions cannot produce legal results unless they are properly served to the relevant parties.
The Chain of Custody: Unless the notification process is completed validly, the transaction is deemed incomplete, and the execution office cannot proceed to subsequent stages (e.g., seizure or sale of assets).

The Risk of Indefinite Complaint: The most severe consequence of improper service relates to the rights of the debtor. If a payment order (ödeme emri) or execution order is not validly served:

The debtor retains the right to file a complaint (şikayet) to lift any liens or attachments (haciz) placed on their assets.
Critical Risk: Unlike standard complaints which often have a 7-day statute of limitations, a complaint regarding the failure to serve the payment order can be filed indefinitely at any stage of the proceedings.

Therefore, a creditor may successfully seize assets and prepare for sale, only to have the entire execution proceeding annulled months or years later due to a technical flaw in the initial service of process.

2. The Hierarchy of Notification Methods

Turkish law does not treat all methods of delivery equally. There is a strict statutory hierarchy that determines how a document must be served. Deviating from this hierarchy without legal justification can render the service "irregular" (usulsüz), giving the debtor grounds to challenge the enforcement proceedings.

2.1. The Standard Procedure: Notification via PTT

The default rule in Turkish Execution Law is that all notifications must be conducted through the Post and Telegraph Organization (PTT).

Legal Basis: Article 1 of the Notification Law and Article 4 of the Notification Regulation explicitly state that, as a rule, notifications in execution and bankruptcy matters are made via PTT.
Operational Reality: In the vast majority of cases, the Execution Office (İcra Dairesi) prepares the document, and a PTT officer delivers it to the address.

2.2. Direct Delivery by Execution Officers (Memur Eliyle)

While PTT is the standard, the law permits direct service by execution officers or bailiffs (mübaşir) in specific, urgent circumstances.

Conditions for Direct Delivery: Notification can be made directly by an execution officer against a receipt (makbuz) in the following cases:
- When specific laws expressly allow it.
- When delay would cause harm (e.g., preventing the removal of assets).
- For notifications between agencies located in the same place.
Procedural Change: Historically, direct delivery required the recipient's permission. However, Law No. 538 removed this requirement to align Turkish law with the Swiss Execution and Bankruptcy Code. Now, permission is not required; a receipt is sufficient.
Documentation: Even in direct delivery, the transaction must be documented with an official "notification report" (tebliğ tutanağı).

Professional Note: Attorneys are also legally permitted to serve documents directly to one another against a receipt. However, typically, Turkish attorneys rarely utilize this method in practice.

2.3. The Modern Era: Electronic Notification (UETS)

With the enactment of Law No. 6099 in 2011, Turkey introduced a legal framework for electronic notification, which has fundamentally changed service procedures for corporate entities.

Mandatory vs. Optional Scope

The law distinguishes between entities forced to use the system and those who may choose it:

Mandatory: Electronic notification is compulsory for Joint Stock Companies (Anonim Şirketler), Limited Liability Companies (Limited Şirketler), and Limited Partnerships divided into shares (Sermayesi paylara bölünmüş komandit şirketler). These entities effectively cannot "hide" from service, as they are legally required to maintain a valid UETS address.
Optional: For natural persons (individuals), electronic notification is optional. It can only be used if the individual explicitly requests it and provides a suitable electronic address.

The "5-Day Deemed Service" Rule

A critical trap for international investors is the timing of validity. Electronic notification is not deemed served the moment it hits the inbox.

The Rule: Notification is deemed to have been made at the end of the fifth day following the date the electronic notification reaches the addressee's electronic address.
Implication: Even if the recipient does not open the email, the clock starts ticking after the 5th day.
Calculation Example: If an email reaches the inbox on 01/12/2009, the notification is deemed served at the end of 06/12/2009 (excluding the arrival day, count five full days). The legal period for objection begins on 07/12/2009.

Failure of Electronic Systems

If electronic notification is impossible due to a mandatory cause (e.g., technical infrastructure failure), the authority resorts to standard notification methods (PTT) to ensure the notification's purpose is not frustrated.

3. The "Address" Conundrum: Where to Serve?

One of the most frequent causes of annulled execution proceedings in Turkey is the failure to strictly adhere to the address hierarchy. International investors often assume that serving the official registered address is sufficient. However, Turkish law dictates a specific sequence: the "Known Address" must be attempted before the "Registered Address" (MERNIS) can be utilized.

3.1. The "Known Address" Principle (Bilinen En Son Adres)

The fundamental rule of notification is found in Article 10 of the Notification Law: notification must be made to the last known address of the person.

Scope of "Address": The concept of "address" is broad. It includes a residence (domicile), a dwelling, or a workplace.
Source of Information: The "known address" is typically the address provided by the creditor in the execution request. It is the address where the creditor believes the debtor effectively resides or works.
Flexibility: While the law prioritizes the address, notification can be validly performed elsewhere (e.g., at the Execution Office or Post Office) if the recipient explicitly applies for it or accepts it there.

3.2. The MERNIS Revolution (Address Registration System)

Historically, finding a debtor's address in Turkey was difficult due to the lack of a centralized database. This changed with the implementation of the Address Registration System (AKS), commonly referred to as MERNIS, under the Civil Registration Services Law No. 5490.

Official Database: Today, the settlement addresses of all Turkish citizens and resident foreigners are recorded in this central system.
Legal Presumption: Under Law No. 6099, the address recorded in the AKS is legally considered the "last known address" if no other address is known or if service to the known address fails.
The End of "Unknown" Addresses: Because the system mandates an address for every citizen, legally speaking, a person's address can almost never be considered "unknown" anymore.

3.3. The "MERNIS Trap": A Strict Hierarchy

This is the most critical compliance point for creditors. You cannot serve the MERNIS address directly without first attempting the known address.

Supreme Court (Yargıtay) precedents have established a strict two-step protocol:

Step 1 (Standard Service): The execution office must first attempt to serve documents to the debtor's "known last address" (e.g., the address in the contract or invoice).
Step 2 (MERNIS Fallback): Only if the notification to the known address is returned undelivered, or if that address is deemed unsuitable for notification, can the authorities rely on the MERNIS address.

The Consequence of Skipping Step 1: If an execution office skips the "known address" and sends a notification directly to the debtor's MERNIS address under Article 21/2, the notification is deemed irregular (usulsüz).

Case Law Example: The 12th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court has ruled that if a creditor knows an address (e.g., from a contract or previous file) but serves the MERNIS address directly, the notification is invalid because it deprives the debtor of the right to be informed at their actual location.
Defeating the Purpose: The rationale is that the MERNIS address might be formal and not where the person actually lives. Serving the actual location ensures the debtor is genuinely informed and can exercise their right to object.

3.4. Exceptions and Nuances

Legal Entities: For companies, the "known address" is generally the address listed in the Trade Registry. However, if a creditor has previously communicated with the company at a different operational address, sending notice there first is prudent.
Change of Address: Once a party has been validly served, they have a legal obligation to update the execution office regarding any address changes. If they move without notifying the office, subsequent notifications can be made to the old address, but strict conditions apply (see Section 6 for details).

4. Specific Scenarios of Service (Who Receives It?)

In Turkish execution law, determining the correct recipient is as crucial as identifying the correct address. Serving the document to the wrong individual—even at the correct address—can render the notification "irregular" (usulsüz) and voidable upon complaint. The law designates specific hierarchies for attorneys, corporate entities, and households.

4.1. Service to Attorneys: The "Mandatory Representation" Rule
For international investors who engage local counsel, this is the most critical rule: If a party is represented by an attorney, notifications must be made to the attorney, not the principal.
- The Principle: In proceedings followed via an attorney, service to the principal (client) is invalid..
- Multiple Attorneys: If a party has multiple lawyers, service to any one of them is legally sufficient. If multiple lawyers are served, the date of the first notification counts as the official service date..
- Workplace Requirement: Notifications to attorneys must be made at their office during official working days and hours..
The Critical Distinction: Initial vs. Subsequent Service
There is a nuanced distinction regarding when the "attorney rule" kicks in during execution proceedings:
1. Judgment-Based Execution (İlamlı İcra): If the execution is based on a court judgment (where an attorney represented the party), the "Execution Order" (İcra Emri) should generally be served to the attorney named in the judgment.. Serving the principal instead of the attorney in these cases is often grounds for cancellation of the order..
2. General Execution (İlamsız İcra): For debt collection without a court judgment, the "Payment Order" (Ödeme Emri) is typically served to the debtor personally, unless they have a general attorney known to accept service..
3. Subsequent Proceedings: Once an attorney submits a power of attorney to the execution file (e.g., to object to a debt), all subsequent documents (sale announcements, expert reports) must be served to that attorney..
4.2. Service to Legal Entities (Companies)
Serving a Turkish company (e.g., A.Ş. or Ltd. Şti.) involves a strict "Chain of Command." You cannot simply hand the document to the receptionist without following procedure.
- Primary Target: Notification must be made to the entity's authorized representative (yetkili mümessil)..
- Substitute Service (Employees): If—and only if—the authorized representative is absent during business hours, service may be made to an employee or officer present at the workplace..
The "Investigation Duty" (Common Pitfall)
The Supreme Court (Yargıtay) imposes a strict burden of proof on the notification officer. For service to an employee (e.g., a secretary or clerk) to be valid, the notification report must explicitly state that the authorized representative was sought but found to be absent..
- Invalid Example: A notification receipt simply signed by "Accountant" or "Secretary" without a note explaining the manager's absence is irregular..
- Valid Example: "The Company Manager was asked for; it was stated they are at the courthouse. Document served to the permanent employee, Mr. X.".
4.3. Service to Natural Persons (Households)
When serving an individual at their home, they do not need to be the one to open the door, but the substitute recipient must meet specific criteria.
- Same Dwelling Requirement: If the addressee is absent, service can be made to family members or servants living in the same dwelling..
  - Nuance: The notification officer must confirm that the person accepting the document actually lives there. Serving a visiting relative or a neighbor (unless under specific Art. 21 conditions) is invalid..
- The "18-Year" Rule: The person accepting the notification on behalf of the addressee must appear to be over 18 years old (increased from 15 by Law No. 4829) and must not be visibly incompetent..
4.4. Special Scenarios
- Workplace (Sole Traders/Professionals): If a professional (e.g., a doctor or artisan) is absent from their workplace, service can be made to a permanent employee..
- Restricted Access Locations: For recipients in hospitals, hotels, factories, or schools, if the person cannot be found, service is made to the manager or administrator of that facility..
  - Constraint: Direct service to a "nurse" or "receptionist" without first seeking the manager is invalid..
- Prisoners: Service to detainees or convicts is conducted via the prison director or an authorized officer..
- Military Personnel: Service to enlisted soldiers (excluding non-commissioned officers) is made to their nearest superior officer (e.g., Unit Commander). 5. Article 21: Notification When the Recipient is Absent
  In the landscape of Turkish debt recovery, Article 21 of the Notification Law is the most frequently litigated section. It governs the procedure when the notification officer arrives at the address but finds no one home. The law distinguishes sharply between a "Temporary Absence" (Standard Procedure) and notification to a "Registered Address" (MERNIS Procedure).
- 5.1. The Standard Procedure (Article 21/1): "Temporary Absence"
  This procedure applies when the notification is sent to a known address (not explicitly marked as a MERNIS address) and the recipient—or anyone else authorized to accept service (family, employees)—is temporarily unavailable.
  
  For this notification to be valid, the officer must follow a strict Three-Step Protocol. Failure to perform any step renders the service usulsüz (irregular):
  1. Delivery to Authority: The officer must deliver the document to the local headman (Muhtar) or the police station against a signature.
  2. Posting the Notice: A specific notice (Form No. 2) stating that the document is with the Muhtar must be affixed to the door of the building/unit.
  3. Informing a Third Party: The officer must notify a neighbor, manager, or doorman that the document has been left with the Muhtar.
  The "Duty to Investigate" (Tahkik)
  Crucially, under Article 21/1, the officer cannot simply assume the person is absent. They have a legal duty to investigate why the person is absent and when they might return (e.g., "gone to market," "at work").
  - Yargıtay Precedent: If the notification report does not explicitly state the specific reason for absence (confirmed by a named neighbor), the notification is often overturned by the Supreme Court. The officer must document the neighbor's name or note if they refused to sign.
  5.2. The MERNIS Fallback (Article 21/2): "Fictional Service"
  Introduced by Law No. 6099, Article 21/2 is a powerful tool for creditors, designed to prevent debtors from evading service by simply not being home or moving without updating their records.
  
  This procedure applies only when:
  1. The notification is sent to the recipient's Address Registration System (MERNIS) address.
  2. The envelope explicitly bears the annotation that it is a "MERNIS Address Notification".
  Key Differences from Standard Procedure
  Under Article 21/2, the process is streamlined and ruthless:
  - Irrelevance of Residency: The notification is valid even if the recipient has moved away permanently or never actually lived there. The MERNIS address is considered the definitive "final address".
  - No Investigation Duty: The officer does not need to ask neighbors where the person is or when they will return.
  - No Neighbor Notification: There is no requirement to inform a neighbor, doorman, or manager.
  The Procedure: The officer simply delivers the document to the Muhtar and affixes the notice to the door. The date the notice is posted on the door is legally deemed the date of service.
  
  5.3. Refusal to Accept Service (Imtina)
  If the addressee (or an authorized substitute like a family member) is present at the address but refuses to accept the document or sign the receipt:
  - The officer must document this refusal.
  - The document is delivered to the Muhtar/police^.
  - The notice is posted on the door.
  - Service is deemed complete as of the posting date.
  5.4. Comparison: Article 21/1 vs. Article 21/2

Feature	Article 21/1 (Standard)	Article 21/2 (MERNIS)
Applicability	Known/Contractual Address	Official MERNIS Address
Investigation Duty	Mandatory: Must record why absent/when returning¹⁹.	None: Officer simply posts the notice²⁰.
Neighbor Notice	Mandatory: Must inform neighbor/doorman²¹.	None: Not required²².
Validity Condition	Recipient must actually reside there (temporarily absent).	Valid even if recipient moved years ago²³.

6. Change of Address and Article 35

In Turkish Execution Law, a debtor cannot escape liability simply by moving and failing to leave a forwarding address. Article 35 of the Notification Law serves as a punitive mechanism against parties who fail to update their addresses, effectively allowing "fictional service" to their old address.

However, the application of Article 35 was radically altered by the 2011 amendments (Law No. 6099), creating a sharp divide between how natural persons and companies are treated.

6.1. The General Obligation to Report Changes

The fundamental rule is that if a party (creditor or debtor) changes their address during ongoing proceedings, they must immediately report the new address to the relevant authority (e.g., the execution office).

Consequence: If the new address is not reported, subsequent notifications can be validly sent to the old address.
Scope: This applies even if the party provided their address in a different file or context, unless they specifically updated it in the current execution file.

6.2. The Procedure: "Posting on the Door"

When Article 35 is invoked, the notification officer does not need to deliver the document to a person.

The Act: The officer affixes a copy of the document to the door of the building at the old address.
The Date: The date the document is posted on the door is legally deemed the date of service.
Result: The legal timeframes (e.g., 7 days to object) begin immediately, even if the building is abandoned or the debtor is miles away.

6.3. The Great Divide: Natural Persons vs. Legal Entities

Post-2011, Article 35 is applied differently depending on the nature of the debtor.

A. Natural Persons (Individuals): The Primacy of MERNIS

For individuals, Article 35 has become a "theoretical" last resort.

The Rule: If an individual moves without reporting it, the authority cannot immediately use Article 35. Instead, they must check the Address Registration System (MERNIS).
MERNIS Override: If the person has a MERNIS address (which virtually all citizens do), the notification must be sent to that MERNIS address under Article 21/2 (see Section 5), not Article 35.
Exception: Article 35 applies to individuals only if they have no registered MERNIS address whatsoever—a scenario the law describes as a "very weak probability".

B. Legal Entities (Companies): The Sword of Article 35

For companies (Joint Stock, Limited, etc.), Article 35 remains a primary and lethal tool.

Official Records: Companies do not have "homes" in MERNIS; they have registered addresses in the Trade Registry.
The Procedure: If a notification sent to a company's registered trade address is returned undelivered (e.g., "moved," "closed," "unknown"), the execution office can immediately order Article 35 service to that same registered address.
No Prior Service Needed: Unlike individuals (who generally must have received one valid notification before Art. 35 applies), companies can be served via Article 35 based solely on their Trade Registry address, even if they never received a prior document.

6.4. Contractual Addresses

A common issue in banking and commercial litigation involves addresses listed in contracts (e.g., loan agreements).

Notarized Contracts: Addresses listed in contracts ratified by a notary public are treated as valid notification addresses. If the debtor moves without notifying the other party via a notary, Article 35 can be applied to the address in the contract.
Ordinary Contracts: For non-notarized contracts (e.g., standard credit card agreements), Yargıtay precedents suggest that Article 35 cannot be applied if the debtor has a valid MERNIS address. The MERNIS address takes precedence over the contractual address for natural persons.

6.5. Turkish Citizens Abroad

For Turkish citizens living abroad who have previously been properly served via foreign representation (Article 25/a), Article 35 applies if they change their foreign address without reporting it.

Procedure: If the foreign address is outdated and no new address is reported, the notification is deemed served 30 days after the document is documented as sent by the Turkish Consulate/Embassy.

7. Notification by Publication (Ilanen Tebligat)

When all other avenues of notification—standard service, direct delivery, MERNIS, and Article 35—have been exhausted and failed, Turkish law permits the "nuclear option": Notification by Publication (Ilanen Tebligat). This is the method of last resort for individuals whose whereabouts are completely unknown.

7.1. Definition and Prerequisites

Notification by Publication is defined as a notification made via press and/or media tools to persons whose address is unknown.

The "Unknown Address" (Adresi Meçhul) Standard: A person is legally considered to have an "unknown address" only if their residence, dwelling, or workplace cannot be found.

Strict Interpretation: You cannot simply claim an address is unknown because a letter was returned. The law requires that notification via the Notification Law (Tebligat Kanunu) and Regulation has been attempted and failed, and subsequent investigations have failed to identify a domicile or business address.
MERNIS Impact: Since the introduction of the Address Registration System (MERNIS), claiming an address is "unknown" for a Turkish citizen is extremely difficult. If a MERNIS address exists, publication is legally impossible; the authorities must serve the MERNIS address under Article 21/2 instead.

7.2. The Mandatory Investigation (Tahkik)

Before an Execution Director can authorize notification by publication, a rigorous investigation must be conducted to prove the address is truly unknown.

The Officer's Duty: The notification officer must first perform an inquiry and have the local headman (muhtar) certify that the address is unknown.
The Authority's Duty: The authority issuing the notification (e.g., Execution Office) must inquire with official or private institutions (e.g., banks, tax offices, tapu) and, crucially, must verify the address through the police (zabıta).
Consequence of Failure: If notification by publication is issued without conducting a police research or official inquiries, the notification is deemed irregular (usulsüz).

7.3. The Procedure

Decision: In execution proceedings, the Execution Director (İcra Müdürü) makes the decision to proceed with publication.
Publication: The notification is published in a newspaper. Following the 2011 amendment (Law No. 6099), it is now mandatory to publish the notice in a newspaper and on an electronic medium (internet news portal).
Posting: A copy of the document must also be hung on the notice board (divanhane) of the execution office. Failure to document this posting with a report (tutanak) renders the notification invalid.

7.4. When is it Deemed Served?

Notification by publication is deemed to have been served 15 days after the date of the final advertisement. The issuing authority has the discretion to set a longer period if necessary.

Critical Warning: If an address is subsequently discovered (e.g., through a new police report), notification by publication cannot be used. Attempting to use publication when a valid address exists is a primary ground for canceling the proceedings.

8. Irregular Notification (Usulsüz Tebligat) and Remedies

For the debtor, proving that a notification was "irregular" (usulsüz) is often the last line of defense to stop an execution proceeding that has already advanced to the stage of asset seizure. However, there is a widely misunderstood legal nuance: An irregular notification is not automatically void (batıl).

8.1. The "Validity Upon Learning" Rule

Under Article 32 of the Notification Law, a notification that fails to comply with procedural rules (e.g., skipping the known address, serving a neighbor without a valid reason) is not considered null and void.

The Conditional Validity: Even if the notification is completely irregular, if the addressee learns of the notification, it is deemed valid.
Deemed Date of Service: In such cases, the date the notification is deemed to have been served is the date the addressee declares they learned of it.
If Never Learned: If the addressee never learns of the irregular notification (e.g., they find out only after their bank account is frozen), the notification is treated as never having occurred.

8.2. The "Declaration" is King

One of the most powerful protections for debtors in Turkish law is the finality of their declaration regarding the learning date.

The Debtor's Statement: The date the debtor claims they learned of the proceeding is accepted by the court.
Cannot Be Disproven: Crucially, the creditor cannot prove the contrary using witnesses. Even if the creditor has witnesses claiming the debtor knew about the debt earlier, the court is bound by the debtor's written declaration in the complaint petition.
- Exception: The only way to disprove the debtor's declaration is with written documentary evidence proving they knew the content of the specific notification earlier (e.g., the debtor withdrew money deposited for them in that specific file).

8.3. The Remedy: Complaint (Şikayet) to the Execution Court

If a notification is irregular, the debtor must take proactive legal action. The Execution Office (İcra Dairesi) cannot ex officio (on its own) decide that a notification was irregular; only the Execution Court (İcra Mahkemesi) can make this ruling upon a complaint.

The Procedure

Filing the Complaint: The debtor must file a complaint with the Execution Court within 7 days of the "learning date".
Strategic Filing: The debtor is legally deemed to have learned of the notification at the latest on the date they file the complaint to the court.
Simultaneous Objection: Since the court will likely correct the service date to the "learning date," the time limit to object to the debt (usually 7 days) starts running from that new date. Therefore, the debtor must file their objection to the debt (borca itiraz) simultaneously with their complaint about the notification to avoid missing the deadline.

8.4. The Court's Decision: Correction, Not Cancellation

A common misconception is that proving irregularity cancels the entire execution proceeding.

Standard Outcome: The court typically does not cancel the payment order (ödeme emri) or the execution proceeding itself. Instead, it issues a decision "Correcting the Notification Date" (Tebliğ tarihinin düzeltilmesi) to the date stated by the debtor.
Consequence: This correction retrospectively validates the debtor's objection to the debt (which would otherwise be late), stopping the execution proceedings and lifting any liens (haciz) placed after the invalid notification.

8.5. Requirement of "Legal Interest" (Hukuki Yarar)

To file this complaint, the debtor must have a current legal interest.

Example of Interest: If the date correction allows the debtor to file a timely objection to the debt, they have a legal interest.
No Interest: If the debtor's attorney has already objected to the debt on time despite the irregular notification, a separate complaint to declare the notification "irregular" may be rejected for lack of legal interest, as the goal (stopping the file) has already been achieved

Appendix: The 10-Point Creditor’s Checklist for Valid Notification

To ensure your execution proceedings in Turkey are bulletproof against "irregular notification" complaints, cross-reference every service attempt against this mandatory compliance list.

1. The "Known Address" First Rule

Check: Have you attempted to serve the debtor at the last known address (contract, invoice, previous file) before using the MERNIS system?
Why: Skipping directly to the MERNIS address without a prior failed attempt at the known address renders the notification irregular.

2. Mandatory Electronic Service for Companies

Check: Is the debtor a Joint Stock (A.Ş.) or Limited (Ltd.) Company? If yes, are you using the UETS (National Electronic Notification System)?
Why: Electronic notification is mandatory for these entities. Physical service is only permitted if electronic service is technically impossible.

3. The "Attorney Priority" Principle

Check: Is the debtor represented by a lawyer in the proceeding (or the judgment being enforced)?
Why: You must serve the attorney. Service to the principal (client) is invalid if they have legal representation on file.

4. Corporate Hierarchy Compliance

Check: If serving a company physically, did the officer confirm the "Authorized Representative" was absent before handing it to a secretary or clerk?
Why: Service to an employee is valid only if the authorized representative is documented as absent during business hours.

5. The "Same Dwelling" Rule for Individuals

Check: If serving a family member or servant at a home, do they actually reside in the same dwelling?
Why: Serving a visiting relative or a neighbor (unless under specific Article 21 conditions) is invalid. The recipient must live there and be over 18 years old.

6. Article 21/1 Investigation Duty

Check: If the recipient is "temporarily absent" (not a MERNIS notification), did the officer record why they are gone and when they will return?
Why: Failure to investigate and document the specific reason for absence (e.g., "at work") makes the notification voidable.

7. The Article 21/2 "MERNIS Annotation"

Check: If serving the MERNIS address as a last resort, does the envelope explicitly bear the "Article 21/2 MERNIS Address" annotation?
Why: Without this specific annotation, the simplified "posting on the door" procedure cannot be used, and standard investigation rules apply.

8. Conflict of Interest (No "Enemy" Service)

Check: Is the person receiving the document a party to the same case with an opposing interest?
Why: You cannot serve a document to a person who is a "hasım" (adversary) in the same proceeding, even if they live with the debtor.

9. Address Change Reporting

Check: Has the debtor moved without notifying the execution office?
Why: If a previous notification was validly made to an address, and the debtor moves without reporting it, you can serve the old address under Article 35 (immediate deemed service). Note: For individuals, check MERNIS first.

10. Notification by Publication as a Last Resort

Check: Have you conducted a police investigation (zabıta araştırması) and official inquiries before requesting publication?
Why: Declaring an address "unknown" without proof of rigorous investigation will cause the publication to be annulled.