Real Estate Law
Tenant Not Paying Rent? Eviction Options Under Turkish Law
What can a landlord do if a tenant stops paying rent in Turkey? A practical guide to eviction through enforcement proceedings and the "two justified notices" route.
What Can I Do If My Tenant Doesn't Pay Rent? Eviction Through Enforcement Proceedings and the "Two Justified Notices" Route
A tenant's failure to pay rent on time is one of the most common problems landlords face. Under Turkish law, there are two principal routes available to a landlord when rent goes unpaid: eviction through non-litigious enforcement proceedings (İİK Art. 269 et seq. and TBK Art. 315), and the "two justified notices" mechanism (TBK Art. 352(2)). These two routes have different requirements, different timelines, and different strategic advantages; confusing one for the other can result in the loss of otherwise valid rights.
This article explains these two routes available when rent is unpaid, the pitfalls commonly encountered in practice, and the deadlines landlords must observe.
1. First Things First: When Does Rent Become Due?
Under TBK Article 314, unless otherwise agreed in the lease or established by local custom, rent becomes due (payable) at the end of each month. Under TBK Article 91, where performance is tied to the beginning or end of a month, that means the first or last day of that month; where only the month — not a specific day — is specified, the last day of that month applies.
In practice, most leases set the payment date within the first five days of the month (the 1st–5th). Where the lease specifies no particular day but simply states rent is payable "in advance," the payment period is generally understood to fall within the first few days of the month (the 1st–3rd). Any default interest that accrues is calculated from that date.
Statute of limitations: Under TBK Article 147, claims arising from unpaid rent are subject to a five-year limitation period; other claims for damages or compensation based on the lease, brought under TBK Article 146, are subject to a ten-year limitation period.
2. Route 1: Eviction Through Non-Litigious Enforcement Proceedings (İİK Art. 269 et seq.)
The fastest and most frequently used route when rent goes unpaid is an eviction-seeking, non-litigious enforcement proceeding under Articles 269 et seq. of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (İİK).
2.1. Stages of the Proceeding
The enforcement request (standard form "Örnek No: 1") is filed with the enforcement office. It must clearly state the amount owed, interest, the basis of the claim (the lease), and the eviction request; it must also expressly note that, under TBK Article 315, if payment is not made within thirty days, termination of the lease and eviction are being sought.
The enforcement office serves the debtor with "Örnek No: 13" — the standard "Payment Order in Proceedings Relating to Ordinary and Agricultural Leases." This payment order also functions as a notice within the meaning of TBK Article 315.
The debtor may object to the enforcement office within seven days of service (İİK Art. 62).
If no objection is filed, the debtor must pay the outstanding debt within thirty days of service (for residential and roofed-workplace leases; sixty days for agricultural leases).
If payment is not made within thirty days, the creditor may, within six months from the end of that period, apply to the enforcement court for the debtor's eviction. This six-month period is one the creditor must monitor carefully.
2.2. What to Do If the Debtor Objects
If the debtor objects within the seven-day period, the proceeding is stayed. The creditor then has two options:
An action to set aside the objection (before the enforcement court): available where the debtor's objection relates only to the debt itself, and the creditor has evidence qualifying as a document under İİK Article 269/c.
An action to annul the objection (before a general court): where the debtor denies the existence of the lease or the authenticity of the signature, the enforcement court — whose jurisdiction is narrow — cannot examine that dispute, so the creditor must bring an action to annul the objection before a general court. The one-year limitation period for that action runs from the date the (even improperly filed) action to set aside the objection was brought.
An important practical note: If the debtor's objection does not clearly and unequivocally deny the existence of the lease (and, where applicable, the authenticity of the signature on it), the lease is deemed accepted (İİK Art. 269(2)). The nature of the objection — whether it disputes the lease itself or merely the amount owed — must therefore be carefully assessed; choosing the wrong type of action can result in dismissal.
2.3. Common Pitfalls and Risks
Filing suit before the thirty-day period has expired: If an eviction-seeking action to set aside or annul the objection is filed before the thirty-day payment period has expired, the court may rule on the monetary claim but will dismiss the eviction request (Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Case No. 2017/8825, Decision No. 2019/5346, dated 12.06.2019; 6th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2015/10497, Decision No. 2016/2720, dated 04.04.2016; 6th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2016/81, Decision No. 2016/7519, dated 14.12.2016; 12th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2025/7070, Decision No. 2025/6027, dated 08.10.2025). It is essential to wait until the full thirty-day period has run.
When the thirty-day deadline falls on a holiday: If the payment period ends on an official holiday, the end of the next business day is deemed the final day for payment.
Enforcement costs even where the debt is paid in time: Even if the rent debt is paid within the thirty-day period, if enforcement proceedings have already been initiated, the debtor is deemed to have caused the proceeding and remains liable for its costs.
Defective service of the payment order: This is not something the enforcement court considers on its own motion; the debtor must raise it as a formal complaint under İİK Article 16(1) within the seven-day period. Moreover, if the creditor's eviction petition has itself been duly served, the debtor is deemed to have thereby learned of the earlier defect in service of the payment order, and must raise that defect both as an objection to the proceeding and as a formal complaint before the enforcement court (Notification Law No. 7201, Art. 32; see also the General Assembly of Civil Chambers, Case No. 2007/6-915, Decision No. 2007/946, dated 05.12.2007, and Case No. 2017/(6)8-1849, Decision No. 2018/48, dated 17.01.2018).
Even a shortfall of a few kuruş can justify eviction: Where an objection has been filed and an action brought, a debt that has been paid short by even a few kuruş may be treated as grounds for eviction (Court of Cassation, 6th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2015/6655, Decision No. 2015/10585, dated 01.12.2015). Where there is even the slightest doubt about the exact amount owed, careful calculation before filing an objection is essential.
2.4. Rules of Evidence and the Enforcement Court's Narrow Jurisdiction
The enforcement court has narrow (limited) jurisdiction, which has important consequences for evidence:
The burden of proving the existence of the lease and the amount of rent lies with the landlord; the burden of proving that payment was made lies with the tenant.
The debtor may only prove that the rent debt was paid using documents of the type specified in İİK Article 269/c (a document notarially executed or with a notarially certified signature, a document acknowledged by the creditor, an official receipt, etc.).
WhatsApp messages, emails, or other message records are not accepted as written evidence before the enforcement court; such evidence can only be considered in an action before a general court (the Civil Court of Peace).
The enforcement court does not hear witnesses and does not stay proceedings pending resolution of a related matter; where the underlying dispute is genuinely contested, it must dismiss the claim on the merits — it has no power to decline jurisdiction.
Payments made by a third party do not extinguish the debt unless accompanied by an explanation or the creditor's consent. A payment made to an account other than the one specified in the lease likewise does not discharge the debt.
2.5. Other Practical Points
A rent claim may be assigned to a third party; however, an assignee does not hold the status of "landlord" and therefore cannot seek eviction — only collection of the debt.
Where there are multiple landlords, they are subject to mandatory joinder: the eviction-seeking proceeding and lawsuit must be brought jointly. However, one landlord may independently pursue enforcement for their own proportionate share of the rent claim — but cannot obtain an eviction order through that proceeding alone.
An owner who does not yet hold the status of landlord (for example, a new owner) must first send the tenant a notice demanding that rent be paid to them before seeking eviction; they may only claim rent amounts that fell due after that notice was served.
An eviction order must be enforced within a reasonable time. Under settled case law, that period is limited to one year; if enforcement is not initiated within a reasonable time after the eviction order is obtained, a subsequently issued enforcement order may be annulled (Court of Cassation, 12th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2025/4272, Decision No. 2025/6445, dated 20.10.2025; Case No. 2024/5376, Decision No. 2024/10498, dated 12.12.2024).
3. Route 2: The "Two Justified Notices" Mechanism (TBK Art. 352(2))
Another route for termination/eviction based on non-payment of rent is the "two justified notices" (iki haklı ihtar) mechanism under TBK Article 352(2). This route operates differently from the default-based route under İİK Article 269 / TBK Article 315, and is generally preferred where a tenant is a repeat, chronic late payer.
3.1. Core Requirements
Two justified notices are required within one rental year. In leases with a term of less than one year, within the lease term; in leases of one year or longer, within a single rental year, the tenant must have failed to pay rent — and been the subject of a written justified notice — on two separate occasions.
Service is mandatory. The notice must be duly served on the tenant. A payment made before service prevents the notice condition from being met; where the date of service and the date of payment coincide, the interpretation favorable to the tenant applies. By contrast, payments made after service do not prevent the notice from counting as "justified."
The mechanism does not arise in leases of indefinite duration or where rent is payable annually.
Non-payment of ancillary expenses cannot be the subject of a two-justified-notices claim. This mechanism applies only to non-payment of rent; a notice issued for unpaid electricity, water, or common-area fees cannot be counted toward the two-justified-notices requirement.
Where an acceleration clause applies, the rent debt cannot be split. If the lease contains an acceleration clause (under which accrued rent becomes due as a lump sum), the resulting total must be demanded in a single notice; it cannot be artificially divided into separate notices to manufacture "two justified notices" (Istanbul Regional Court of Appeal, 49th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2020/2168, Decision No. 2023/711, dated 12.04.2023).
Pursuing accrued rent in a single, consolidated proceeding is not an abuse of right. Rent debts already in default should be pursued as a consolidated total in a single proceeding. This principle also applies to the two-justified-notices mechanism (Court of Cassation, 6th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2012/6847, Decision No. 2012/9875, dated 02.07.2012; Case No. 1995/8506, Decision No. 1995/9732, dated 27.09.1995).
A notice is not subject to any particular form. It is sufficient that a notice demanding payment of rent reaches the tenant in any manner, and that payment is made after service of that notice, for the breach to be deemed justified (Court of Cassation, 6th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2001/4392, Decision No. 2001/4683, dated 04.06.2001). The omission, from a notice, of the specific month to which the demanded rent relates does not itself invalidate the notice (Court of Cassation, 6th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2014/8844, Decision No. 2014/11098, dated 15.10.2014).
The lawsuit must be filed within one month of the end of the rental year. An eviction action based on two justified notices must be filed within one month from the end of the rental year in which the notices were given — this is essentially what distinguishes it from a default action under TBK Article 315.
Enforcement proceedings (Örnek 13) also serve as a notice. There is no need for a separate notarial notice; a duly served enforcement payment order also qualifies as a justified notice.
Where there are multiple landlords, notice and lawsuit must proceed together. Landlords subject to mandatory joinder must issue the notice jointly and bring the lawsuit jointly; a defect arising from the notice not having been issued jointly cannot later be cured (Istanbul Regional Court of Appeal, 54th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2023/2795, Decision No. 2024/2643, dated 04.12.2024).
3.2. Month-by-Month Enforcement of Rent Claims and Its Relationship to the Two-Justified-Notices Route
A scenario frequently seen in practice is a tenant who repeatedly pays several consecutive months' rent late. In such cases, a landlord may initiate a separate enforcement proceeding for each month (for example, on 6 February for February's rent, and on 6 March for March's rent). Each of these proceedings, once its thirty-day waiting period has run, may separately form the basis of a default action under TBK Article 315; these actions are not treated as duplicative of one another, since each is based on a claim for a different month's rent.
An important point here: these accumulating enforcement proceedings and notices may also separately give rise to a right under the two-justified-notices mechanism (TBK Art. 352(2)) — since an enforcement payment order itself qualifies as a notice. As long as none of these actions has become final, both the default-based eviction actions and a two-justified-notices action may be brought separately; there is no issue of duplicative litigation or bad-faith multiplication of claims among them. However the tenant retains their status as tenant until whichever eviction action is decided first becomes final; in the other, now-moot actions, the party who caused that action to be filed remains liable for the related litigation costs.
4. Choosing Between the Two Routes: Which One, and When?
Criterion | Eviction via Enforcement Proceedings (İİK Art. 269 / TBK Art. 315) | Two Justified Notices (TBK Art. 352(2)) |
|---|---|---|
Scope | Rent — and, under certain conditions, ancillary expenses | Rent only |
Process | Through the enforcement office; if no objection, eviction may be requested directly | A notarial notice or enforcement payment order, issued on two separate occasions, followed by a lawsuit |
Payment period | At least 30 days (residential/roofed-workplace leases) | The law sets no separate payment period; service of the notice is sufficient |
Deadline to sue | Eviction request within 6 months from the end of the payment period | Lawsuit within 1 month from the end of the rental year |
Cost/speed | Generally cheaper and faster; a single instance of default suffices | Requires two separate instances of default within the same rental year; the process can take longer |
Best suited for | A single serious rent debt, or an ongoing one | A tenant with a recurring, chronic pattern of late payment |
In practice, these two routes are not mutually exclusive. Where a tenant both repeatedly pays late and has accumulated an outstanding debt, a landlord may pursue both routes in parallel — each addressing a different period.
5. Conclusion
When rent goes unpaid, a landlord has two principal tools available: the fast and relatively low-cost eviction-seeking, non-litigious enforcement proceeding, and the two-justified-notices mechanism, useful against a tenant's recurring late payments. Each route carries its own deadlines, formal requirements, and evidentiary rules; failure to strictly comply with these can result in the dismissal of an otherwise valid claim. Given the enforcement court's narrow jurisdiction and its limited acceptance of evidence in particular, correctly structuring the enforcement proceeding and any subsequent lawsuit from the outset is of considerable importance.
Should you need support collecting a rent debt, evicting a tenant, or drafting a lease that anticipates these processes, you can reach us through our contact page.
Please note: This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice tailored to any specific matter. Because the applicable legal advice depends heavily on the particular terms of each lease and each enforcement proceeding, you should always consult a lawyer to determine whether the analysis above applies to your situation.
Sources:
Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK), Law No. 6098 — Articles 91, 146, 147, 314, 315, 352
Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (İİK), Law No. 2004 — Articles 16, 62, 78, 269, 269/a, 269/c
Notification Law No. 7201 — Article 32
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Case No. 2017/8825, Decision No. 2019/5346, dated 12.06.2019
Court of Cassation, 6th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2015/10497, Decision No. 2016/2720, dated 04.04.2016
Court of Cassation, 6th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2016/81, Decision No. 2016/7519, dated 14.12.2016
Court of Cassation, 12th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2025/7070, Decision No. 2025/6027, dated 08.10.2025
Court of Cassation, 6th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2015/6655, Decision No. 2015/10585, dated 01.12.2015
Court of Cassation General Assembly of Civil Chambers, Case No. 2007/6-915, Decision No. 2007/946, dated 05.12.2007
Court of Cassation General Assembly of Civil Chambers, Case No. 2017/(6)8-1849, Decision No. 2018/48, dated 17.01.2018
Court of Cassation, 12th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2025/4272, Decision No. 2025/6445, dated 20.10.2025
Court of Cassation, 12th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2024/5376, Decision No. 2024/10498, dated 12.12.2024
Istanbul Regional Court of Appeal, 49th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2020/2168, Decision No. 2023/711, dated 12.04.2023
Court of Cassation, 6th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2012/6847, Decision No. 2012/9875, dated 02.07.2012; Case No. 1995/8506, Decision No. 1995/9732, dated 27.09.1995
Court of Cassation, 6th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2001/4392, Decision No. 2001/4683, dated 04.06.2001
Court of Cassation, 6th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2014/8844, Decision No. 2014/11098, dated 15.10.2014
Istanbul Regional Court of Appeal, 54th Civil Chamber, Case No. 2023/2795, Decision No. 2024/2643, dated 04.12.2024
Disclamer
What's the first thing I should do if my tenant stops paying rent?
The fastest route is to initiate an eviction-seeking, non-litigious enforcement proceeding under İİK Article 269 et seq. Once the enforcement request is filed, the debtor is served with a standard payment order (Örnek 13); if the debtor does not object within seven days and fails to pay within thirty days, the landlord may request eviction from the enforcement court within six months.
What happens if the tenant objects to the enforcement proceeding?
If the tenant's objection relates only to the amount owed and sufficient documentary evidence exists, an action to set aside the objection can be brought before the enforcement court. If the tenant denies the existence of the lease or the signature on it, an action to annul the objection must be brought before a general court instead; that action is subject to a one-year limitation period.
When should I use the "two justified notices" route instead?
The two-justified-notices mechanism (TBK Art. 352(2)) is best suited to a tenant who pays late on two separate occasions within a single rental year — that is, a recurring pattern of late payment. For a single serious rent debt, or an ongoing one, the eviction-seeking enforcement proceeding is generally faster and less costly.
Are WhatsApp messages or bank statements accepted as evidence before the enforcement court?
No. Because the enforcement court has narrow jurisdiction, payment can only be proven using documents of the type listed in İİK Article 269/c — a notarially executed or certified document, a document acknowledged by the creditor, an official receipt, and similar. WhatsApp messages, emails, or other message records are not accepted as evidence in that forum.
What happens if I file suit before the thirty-day payment period has expired?
If an eviction-seeking action is filed before the full thirty-day period has run, the court may rule on the monetary claim but will dismiss the eviction request. It is essential to wait until the thirty-day period has fully expired before filing.
More Insights
Aug 12, 2026
Rent Paid but Utilities Unpaid: Can a Tenant Be Evicted?
Can a tenant who pays rent but not utilities, water, or maintenance fees be evicted under Turkish law? A review of the Court of Cassation's 2025 ruling.
Aug 4, 2026
How Is Turkish Citizenship Acquired Through Marriage?
The conditions, documentation, and procedure under which a foreign national married to a Turkish citizen may acquire Turkish citizenship pursuant to Article 16 of Law No. 5901 and its Implementing Regulation, including the effect of divorce, death of the spouse, and a declaration of absence (gaiplik).
Jul 27, 2026
Eligible Real Estate for Turkish Citizenship: Property Types, Requirements, and Restrictions in 2026
Turkey allows foreign nationals who acquire qualifying real estate worth at least USD 400,000 to apply for citizenship by exception. Not every property qualifies, however — agricultural land, unbuilt plots subject to a project-development obligation, and timeshare rights are excluded, and the acquisition, valuation, and payment process must follow specific legal procedures.