When Do Turkish Courts Have International Jurisdiction? MÖHUK Article 40 and Domestic Venue Rules

1. Article 40 is the gateway rule for ordinary international civil litigation

International jurisdiction answers a preliminary procedural question: does a Turkish court have authority to adjudicate the dispute at all? It is different from applicable law. A Turkish court can have jurisdiction and still apply German, English, French or another foreign substantive law under MÖHUK’s conflict rules.

Article 40 prevents courts from creating an entirely separate international venue code for every foreign dispute. Instead, it directs them to the domestic Turkish territorial-jurisdiction rules, subject to special MÖHUK provisions.

This makes knowledge of the Code of Civil Procedure, Commercial Code, Labour Courts Law, Consumer Protection Law and other domestic venue provisions essential in international cases.

2. Which domestic venue rules can establish Turkish jurisdiction?

Under Article 40, identify the provision connecting the actual claim to a Turkish court. Subject-matter jurisdiction, territorial venue and the law governing the merits are separate questions.

An unrelated Turkish bank account is not a universal basis for every claim. Article 9 refers to the asset that is the subject of the dispute. Assets relevant only to collection must be distinguished from a statutory jurisdiction connection.

Example: a claim concerning defective delivery in Mersin requires examination of the contractual obligation and performance documents. A title-cancellation claim concerning a Mersin apartment raises Article 12. The same parties can therefore need different jurisdiction analyses for different claims.

3. Always check MÖHUK’s special rules before relying on Article 40 alone

Articles 41–46 contain special international-jurisdiction provisions for Turkish citizens’ personal-status cases, certain cases concerning foreigners, inheritance, employment, consumer and insurance disputes. These special rules can override the ordinary Article 40 approach.

Article 47 then regulates agreements selecting foreign courts, while Article 48 deals with security for costs and Article 49 with foreign-state immunity in private-law disputes.

A broad Article 40 argument should therefore never be filed before the dispute is classified under the special provisions.

4. A foreign defendant can be sued in Türkiye when a Turkish venue rule supports jurisdiction

Foreign nationality does not create procedural immunity. A German, American, Russian, British or Gulf-based individual or company can be a defendant in a Turkish civil or commercial action where Turkish international jurisdiction exists.

For example, a foreign company can be sued concerning performance to be made in Türkiye, damage occurring in Türkiye, Turkish property or another connection recognised by domestic venue law.

What matters is the legally relevant connection, not whether the foreign defendant has a Turkish passport, Turkish shareholder or permanent Turkish office.

5. International contract disputes require a separate venue analysis from governing law

A contract can choose English law yet still be litigated in a Turkish court if Turkish jurisdiction exists and no valid exclusive foreign-jurisdiction or arbitration arrangement prevents it. Conversely, a Turkish-law contract can be subject to foreign jurisdiction.

Do not treat the governing-law clause and jurisdiction clause as the same clause. One selects substantive law; the other selects the forum.

Our MÖHUK Article 24 contract-law guide explains the governing-law side separately.

6. Place of performance can create Turkish venue in contractual cases

Turkish procedural law recognises venue connections based on performance in circumstances defined by the applicable rules. In cross-border supply, construction, service or payment disputes, the place where the relevant contractual obligation was or should have been performed can therefore be important.

The court should identify the specific obligation in dispute rather than the commercial relationship in general. Delivery of goods, payment of price, transfer of title and provision of services can have different places of performance.

Contract wording, Incoterms, bank-payment clauses and delivery documents can be important evidence.

7. Cross-border tort jurisdiction depends on Turkish procedural connections

A road accident, online tort, product injury or professional negligence with a Turkish connection can fall within Turkish jurisdiction where domestic tort-venue rules support it.

The place of the wrongful act and place where damage occurred can be relevant. Online claims require a disciplined analysis because content can be accessible worldwide; mere technical accessibility should not automatically produce unlimited jurisdiction.

Article 34 or a special MÖHUK tort article selects substantive law only after the court’s jurisdiction is established.

8. Turkish immovable-property disputes often have a strong Turkish jurisdiction connection

Actions directly concerning ownership, registration, cancellation of title, partition and certain rights in Turkish immovable property are closely connected to the Turkish registry system and can involve exclusive domestic jurisdiction rules.

A foreign court-selection clause cannot always displace exclusive Turkish jurisdiction. Article 47 itself allows foreign-court agreements only where territorial jurisdiction is not determined on an exclusive basis.

Foreign investors should therefore distinguish a contractual damages claim from an action directly seeking a change in Turkish land-register rights.

9. Corporate disputes depend on the company and claim type

A dispute concerning a Turkish company’s shareholder resolution, director liability, share transfer, information rights or liquidation can have Turkish jurisdiction through company-law venue rules. The foreign residence of a shareholder does not remove the corporate connection.

Where the company is foreign but assets or contractual performance are in Türkiye, the analysis can differ. The corporate personal law, jurisdiction and substantive claim should be separated.

Trade-register records and the company’s registered seat are usually central procedural evidence.

10. Employment cases have a special rule in Article 44

Article 44 specifically protects employee access to Turkish courts. It identifies the Turkish court at the employee’s habitual workplace and, for suits by the employee, also recognises specified connections to the employer and employee’s residence or habitual residence.

Because Article 44 is special, counsel should use it rather than relying only on general Article 40.

Jurisdiction agreements cannot eliminate the protected courts identified in Article 44.

11. Consumer jurisdiction is separately protected under Article 45

For consumer contracts within Article 26, Article 45 allows the consumer specified Turkish forum choices and restricts suits brought against the consumer.

A foreign e-commerce seller’s standard terms cannot automatically deprive a protected Turkish consumer of these statutory jurisdiction rights.

Our Article 45 jurisdiction guide addresses the consumer-specific forum separately.

12. Insurance disputes use Article 46

Article 46 identifies Turkish courts connected to the insurer’s principal business, branch or agency and gives special protection to the policyholder, insured and beneficiary when they are defendants.

International travel, cargo, property and liability policies can therefore produce Turkish jurisdiction even where the insurer is a foreign group.

The insurance policy’s governing law and jurisdiction must be read separately.

13. Exclusive jurisdiction limits party choice

Some domestic Turkish venue rules are exclusive. Where jurisdiction is exclusive, the parties cannot validly remove the dispute to a foreign court through Article 47.

Exclusive jurisdiction is especially important in disputes tied to Turkish registries, property and other public organisational interests.

The court can examine certain jurisdiction defects on its own where procedural law requires it.

14. Foreign-court clauses are governed by Article 47

Parties to a foreign-element obligation dispute can select a foreign court if the Turkish territorial jurisdiction is not exclusive. The agreement must be provable in writing.

If valid, a Turkish court generally hears the case only if the foreign court declines jurisdiction or if no timely Turkish jurisdiction objection is raised, subject to Article 47.

Employment, consumer and insurance protected forums cannot be eliminated by agreement.

15. What happens if the defendant does not object?

Under HMK Article 19, a non-exclusive venue objection must be raised in the statement of defence, within the applicable time and in the required form. The objecting party must identify the competent court, choosing one if several are competent. For a foreign-court agreement, Article 47 and the wording of that agreement also need examination.

Failure to object can make the court hearing the case competent; it does not cause that court to lose jurisdiction. This consequence must be distinguished from exclusive venue, which the court examines on its own under Article 19(1). It also does not cure a separate defect in subject-matter jurisdiction.

Send counsel the complete claim, annexes, service envelope or electronic notification, delivery date and forum clause promptly. Do not calculate the response deadline from the date a translation reaches a foreign head office. The valid service event and applicable procedure must be checked first.

16. Jurisdiction is not the same as valid international service

Even when a Turkish court has jurisdiction, the foreign defendant must be notified through legally valid service procedures. Hague Service Convention, bilateral treaties, diplomatic channels or Turkish notification legislation can apply depending on the destination country.

Invalid service can affect defence rights and later recognition or enforcement of the judgment abroad.

Current foreign addresses should therefore be provided accurately; intentionally using an obsolete Turkish address creates serious procedural risk.

17. A jurisdiction strategy should include collectability from the beginning

Winning in Türkiye is commercially useful only if the judgment can be enforced against assets. Before filing, identify whether the defendant has assets in Türkiye or whether recognition and enforcement abroad will be needed.

A foreign enforcement state can scrutinise Turkish jurisdiction and service under its own recognition rules. A tenuous jurisdiction theory can therefore create problems later even if the Turkish proceedings move forward.

Asset location, interim measures and enforcement treaties should be incorporated into the litigation plan.

Conclusion

MÖHUK Article 40 makes Turkish domestic territorial-jurisdiction rules the general foundation of Turkish international jurisdiction. Foreign nationality neither creates immunity nor automatically creates Turkish jurisdiction. The dispute must first be classified, special MÖHUK provisions checked, a valid domestic venue connection identified, and any exclusive jurisdiction, court-selection or arbitration arrangement analysed. Service abroad and enforcement are separate procedural stages that should be planned from the outset.