ENTRANCE
1-) Legal Basis and Description of the Case
The action for the removal of an objection is regulated in Articles 68 and 68/a of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (EBL). Within the framework of this
provision, a creditor may apply to the enforcement court to request the removal of an objection if there are specific documents and promissory notes
supporting the enforcement proceedings and the debtor has raised an objection. The EBL text clearly specifies which documents will result in this action
and the timeframes.
Brief description: The action for removal of objection is a type of action subject to special procedure, filed in the enforcement court to
remove (in whole or in part) the objection made against the enforcement proceedings without a judgement.
2-) Differences in Terms of Types of Cases and Article Text
Final removal of the objection (EBL art. 68/b):
If the basis for the enforcement proceedings is a document that bears the nature of a judgment, such as a signed confession or a document
containing a debt acknowledgement attested by a notary, a receipt or document duly issued by official authorities, the creditor may request the
removal of the objection within six months from the date of notification. If the request is not made within this period, further enforcement
proceedings cannot be initiated on the same basis without a judgment.
Temporary removal of objection (EBL art. 68/a):
If the basis for the enforcement proceedings is a private promissory note and the debtor has refused to sign, the creditor may
request the enforcement court to temporarily lift the objection to the signature within six months of the date of notification. The
judge will take the parties’ explanations and may request additional evidence as necessary. In such cases, the procedure is
provisional.
Other special cases (subheadings of EBL art. 68/b):
There are document types and evidence arrangements stipulated in articles 68/b and 68/ç for current account
receivables, account summaries for loan receivables, etc. The details of these are important in practice.
3-) Conditions of the Case
Document supporting the tracking:The creditor must have a document of the type listed in Article 68 of the EBL (e.g., a notarized
debt acknowledgement, a receipt issued by official authorities, a promissory note with an acknowledged signature, or an account
statement).
Condition for notification:The debtor’s objection must be duly notified to the creditor. The date of notification is the
starting point for exercising the right. Court of Appeals precedents carefully consider the procedure and proof of
notification.
Duration:As a general rule, requests to lift an objection must be submitted to the enforcement court within six
months of notification of the objection. The application and exceptions to the six-month period may vary depending
on the law and precedent.
Authority:The case is heard in the enforcement court. The procedure is usually expedited; the court considers the evidence
within a limited framework and makes a decision based on a narrow review.
4-) Types of Cases for Removal of Objection
The creditor can file a lawsuit to remove the objection against the debtor’s objection to the enforcement proceedings in two
ways:
A-)Final removal of objection (ECB art. 68)
B-)Temporary removal of objection (EBL art. 68/a)
A-) Case for Final Removal of Objection
If the debt subject to enforcement proceedings is tied to one of the documents listed in Articles 68-68/a of the Enforcement and
Bankruptcy Code, the creditor may request the enforcement court to lift the objection. There are three types of documents the creditor
must present to request the final removal of the objection:
The first of these is an ordinary promissory note with an acknowledgement of signature. If the signature on the ordinary promissory note, which forms the basis of
enforcement proceedings, is accepted by the debtor and the promissory note contains an unconditional acknowledgement of debt for a specific amount, the creditor
may request a final removal of the objection based on this promissory note.- Secondly, the promissory note whose signature is approved by a notary public, and just like ordinary promissory notes with an acknowledgement of signature,
promissory notes containing an unconditional acknowledgement of debt approved by a notary public are among the documents that ensure the final removal of the
objection.
Documents issued by official bodies or authorities within their authority and in accordance with the procedure are
also considered to be sufficient to remove the objection. Because these documents are issued by official bodies or
authorities, they do not bear the debtor’s signature; therefore, the requirement for the debtor’s signature to be
acknowledged or confirmed is not required. However, for these documents to be considered sufficient to remove
the objection, the debtor must unconditionally pay a certain amount of debt.
they need to show.
B-) Temporary Removal of Objection (Signature Objection) Case
A creditor’s application to the enforcement court is a request for the temporary removal of an objection based on Article 68/a of the Enforcement and
Bankruptcy Code. If the debtor objects to their signature on a promissory note during enforcement proceedings through general seizure, the creditor may
apply to the enforcement court within a legal period of six months from the date of notification of the objection and request the temporary removal of the
objection. In this case, the enforcement court may conduct a signature examination pursuant to Article 68/a of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code, and
if it determines that the signature on the promissory note is the handiwork of the debtor, the objection may be removed.
decides to temporarily remove the request, otherwise it decides to reject the request.
5-) Commencement of the Objection Period in the Case of Removal of Objection
The legislature has set time limits for both the annulment of objection and the removal of objection. This period is six months
for the annulment of objection (Articles 68, 68-a) and one year for the annulment of objection (Article 67). In both cases, the
time limit begins from the notification of the objection to the payment order to the creditor or their attorney pursuant to Article
62/2 of the Law and is provided in accordance with the provisions of the Notification Law.
6-) Execution Denial Compensation in the Case of Removal of Objection
Pursuant to the final paragraph of the amended Article 68 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code, if the request for removal of the
objection is accepted on merits, the debtor will be sentenced to compensation of no less than 20%, if the request is rejected for the
same reasons, regardless of the other party’s good or bad faith. Pursuant to the final paragraph of Article 68 of the Enforcement and
Bankruptcy Code, for enforcement compensation to be awarded, the debtor must object to the payment order during the enforcement
proceedings and the creditor must sue the receivable in court, demanding enforcement denial compensation and being successful.
However, the debtor’s bad faith objection is not a legal requirement. Enforcement compensation is awarded to a party who objects to
enforcement proceedings against them and who promptly resolves the matter.
It is a sanction imposed on the debtor that prevents the completion of the debt. Furthermore, the receivable
must be liquid and certain. If the actual amount of the receivable is known, fixed, or determined by the
debtor, all the elements are known, or must be known, so that the debtor can verify and determine the
amount of the debt; in other words, if the debtor can determine the amount of the debt on their own, then
the receivable must be considered liquid and certain.
7-) Ordinary Promissory Note with Confirmed Signature
If the signature on a promissory note that forms the basis of enforcement proceedings is accepted by the debtor and the note
contains an unconditional acknowledgement of debt for a specific amount of money, the creditor may request the final removal
of the objection based on this promissory note and prove the claim based on this promissory note. This promissory note must
contain certain elements:- It must be a written document- Signature of the debtor- Acknowledgement of debt- The debt acknowledgement must be unconditional- The debt acknowledgement is about a certain amount of money debt.
A written document that meets these conditions will qualify as an ordinary promissory note with an acknowledged signature within the meaning of Article
68/1 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code. An ordinary promissory note with an acknowledged signature contains an unconditional acknowledgement
of debt. At the same time, the debtor has acknowledged the signature. If the legal proceedings are based on this document, the debtor’s objection to the
signature on the promissory note cannot be revoked definitively. However, the objection to the signature can be temporarily revoked.
At this point, the court will only check whether the signature belongs to the debtor.
😎 Competent and Authorized Court
If enforcement proceedings are initiated based on documents in Article 68 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code (EBL), a simpler
and faster method for overturning an objection has been established. To apply for an objection, the creditor submits a petition to the
competent enforcement court. In a case for a definitive objection removal, the court is authorized and authorized to file the case where
the enforcement office where the enforcement proceedings were filed is located. The courts authorized for the creditor’s objection
removal case are the Enforcement Courts, and the courts authorized are the Enforcement Courts.
It is the Enforcement Court to which the enforcement office is affiliated.
9-) Limitation Period in the Case for Removal of Objection
The creditor’s period of time to file a lawsuit to remove an objection is six months from the date the objection is notified
to the creditor. The creditor may file a lawsuit with the enforcement court to remove an objection without waiting for
the objection to be served. This six-month period is statute of limitations, and if the creditor fails to file a lawsuit to
remove an objection within this period, they cannot file another enforcement action. The enforcement court must, on its
own initiative, review whether this six-month statute of limitations has elapsed.
If the six-month period specified in Article 68/1 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code (EBL) passes without filing a lawsuit for the annulment of the
objection, the enforcement proceedings will not be terminated. This is because the creditor can continue the enforcement proceedings by filing a lawsuit
for the annulment of the objection within the one-year period stipulated in Article 67. The enforcement proceedings will be terminated after the one-year
period stipulated in Article 67 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code (EBL) has elapsed. “If the enforcement proceedings of the creditor whose claim is
objected are based on a document containing a signature, an acknowledgment of the debt, certified by a notary, or a receipt or document issued by
official bodies or competent authorities within their authority and in accordance with the procedure, the creditor may request the annulment of the
objection within six months from the date of notification. If the objection is not requested to be annulled within this period,
Otherwise, no further proceedings can be carried out without a judgement.”
10-) Evidence and Proof
In this case, the nature of the document on which the creditor relies and whether the content of the document will have legal
consequences (e.g. debt acknowledgment, promissory note, official receipt) are decisive.
The court will consider whether the debtor has submitted documentation demonstrating the existence of an objection based on the document. If the
debtor cannot provide documentation to support their claim, the objection will be dismissed.
Limited review: The enforcement court generally conducts a technical and limited review in this case; for example, in cases where a
signature is disputed, strong evidence is required to prove it is a forgery. Additional expert witnesses or written evidence may be
requested if necessary.
11-) Differences Between Removal of Objection and Cancellation of Objection
Legal nature:
Removal of objection is a special procedure in the enforcement court based on documents; cancellation of objection is a debt lawsuit filed
in the civil court of first instance within the framework of general provisions and has a wider opportunity for evidence.
Time difference:
There is generally a statute of limitations of six months for the removal of an objection and one year for the cancellation of
an objection (from the date of notification of the objection). Therefore, creditors should consider in a timely manner which
avenue is most suitable for them.
Impact of the results:
Rejecting a request to lift the objection does not constitute final judgment. Therefore, the creditor may subsequently apply for annulment of
the objection (Article 67 of the EBL). Paying attention to this order is strategically important.
12-) Supreme Court Jurisprudence
Proof of notification:
Supreme Court decisions consistently hold that the limitation period will not run if the objection is not
properly served on the creditor. Electronic notification practices and the impact of e-notification have
gained importance recently.
Value of the document:
Courts and the Supreme Court of Appeals evaluate which document meets the “constitutional judgment” criterion in Article
68 on a case-by-case basis. For example, while a notarized acknowledgement of debt is considered strong, a simple written
contract may not always be sufficient.
Gradual rights paths:
In practice, first seeking to have an objection removed and then, if rejected, proceeding to annul the objection is a
common and legally compliant strategy. The Supreme Court has explicitly recognized this.
13-) Important Matters for the Creditor
Document scanning:Before applying, the creditor must have a legal expert confirm whether the documents in his
possession fall within the scope of Article 68 of the EBL.
Notification records:Documents showing when the objection was notified to the creditor (notification receipt, e
notification records) must be meticulously preserved.
Timing:It is critical that the 6-month period is not missed; if the application is delayed, the creditor can only sue for the receivable in
accordance with general provisions.
Precautionary measures:In this case, measures such as direct provisional seizure are not common. However, alternative legal
remedies that would mitigate the creditor’s losses may be considered.
Lawyer Support:Since the objection removal case is a case that requires quite technical knowledge, it is extremely
important to follow the process with the help of a lawyer.
CONCLUSION
A lawsuit to remove an objection is an important remedy in enforcement law, aiming to eliminate an objection to enforcement
proceedings and ensure the continuation of enforcement proceedings. To utilize this remedy, the creditor must prove the unfairness
of the objection using the documents specified in Articles 68 and 68/A of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code. The quality and
sufficiency of these documents directly influence whether the case will be accepted.
The case is conducted in the enforcement court according to a simple procedure and does not constitute a final judgment. In this
respect, the creditor is also given the opportunity to later file a lawsuit in the general courts to annul the objection. This balance is
achieved between the principle of speed in enforcement law and the debtor’s right to a defense.
Requests to lift an objection are subject to a statute of limitations and must be filed within six months of
notification of the objection. If the deadline is missed, this remedy will not be available.
Furthermore, if the debtor is found to have objected in bad faith, the court may award
denial damages. This is intended to protect the creditor against bad-faith objections.
In conclusion, while the objection removal lawsuit is a fast, practical, and effective legal
remedy, it is strictly bound by procedural and documentary rules. In practice, a successful
outcome requires adherence to timeframes and a strong legal justification.
THE MOST CURIOSITY ABOUT THE CASE FOR THE RESOLUTION OF THE OBJECTION
THINGS TAKEN
1-) What is the case of annulment of objection?
The action for removal of objection is a special method that allows the enforcement proceedings, which have been suspended due to the
debtor’s objection to the payment order in non-judgmental enforcement proceedings, to continue as a result of the creditor’s application to the
enforcement court with certain documents.
2-) Which law regulates the case of annulment of objection?
This case is regulated in Articles 68 and 68/a of the Execution and Bankruptcy Law.
3-) Who can file a lawsuit to withdraw the objection?
The creditor who initiated the non-judgment enforcement proceedings or his/her legal representative may file a lawsuit for removal of objection.
4-) In which court can the case for annulment of objection be filed?
This lawsuit is filed with the enforcement court, which has jurisdiction over enforcement law. The enforcement court will make a decision after
conducting a swift and limited review.
5-) What is the deadline for filing a lawsuit to remove the objection?
A lawsuit must be filed within six months of the objection being served on the creditor. This is the statute of limitations, and if
this period expires, a lawsuit cannot be filed to remove the objection.
6-) What documents are required in the case of annulment of objection?
To remove an objection, the creditor must possess one of the documents specified in Article 68 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy
Code. These documents include:- Documents containing a notarized debt acknowledgement,- Receipts or documents received from official authorities,- Promissory notes with acknowledged signatures,- Special documents such as account statements.
7-) What is the difference between the case of annulment of objection and the case of annulment of objection?
Case for annulment of objection:It is filed in the enforcement court, can only be proven with certain documents and has a duration of
6 months.
Case for annulment of objection:It is filed in the civil or commercial court of first instance, all kinds of evidence can be used and its
duration is 1 year.
😎 What is the scope of the court’s review in the case of annulment of objection?
The court only examines the document supporting the objection and conducts a limited review. No detailed evaluation of evidence is
conducted within the framework of general provisions.
9-) What happens if the debtor refuses to sign?
If the debtor refuses to sign, the creditor files a lawsuit to remove the provisional objection. If deemed necessary, the court may order
an expert examination to assess the authenticity of the signature.
10-) What happens if the case for annulment of objection is won?
If the court rules in favor of the creditor, the debtor’s objection is lifted, and enforcement proceedings resume. The creditor
may proceed with foreclosure and sale proceedings.
11-) What happens if the objection removal case is rejected?
If the court rejects the lawsuit, the creditor cannot file a rescission lawsuit for the same claim. However, they
can file a rescission lawsuit and claim their claim under general provisions.
12-) Can compensation for denial of execution be claimed in the case of annulment of objection?
Yes. If the debtor has filed an unjust or malicious objection, the court may award compensation to the creditor for denying
enforcement proceedings. This compensation generally cannot be less than 20% of the amount of the debt.
13-) Is it mandatory to hire a lawyer in the case of annulment of objection?
Hiring a lawyer is not mandatory. However, because the litigation process requires technical knowledge, it is recommended that you
follow up with a lawyer to avoid losing your rights.
14-) How is the fee calculated in the case of annulment of objection?
Because the objection removal case is of a special nature, it is subject to a fixed fee. The fee is determined by a fixed
amount, not by the subject matter of the case.
15-) What happens if a lawsuit to withdraw the objection is not filed?
If the creditor fails to file this lawsuit within the six-month period, the objection becomes final. In this case, the creditor cannot override
the debtor’s objection, but may pursue its rights under general provisions by filing a lawsuit to annul the objection.
COURT OF APPEALS REGARDING THE CASE FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE OBJECTION
DECISIONS
1-) Supreme Court of Appeals General Assembly of Civil Chambers Docket Number: 2008/6-121, Decision
Number: 2008/123 and Date: 13.02.2008;
“…The plaintiff initiated enforcement proceedings based on a one-year written lease agreement, requesting the
collection of the rent receivable. Upon notification of the payment order, the defendant debtor, in his objection
filed within the legally timed period, did not object to the lease or the amount of the debt, but argued that he had
no debt. Since the defendant debtor, in his objection filed upon notification of the payment order, did not object
to the lease or the amount of the rent, but argued that he had no debt…
…He must prove his defense with one of the documents specified in Article 68 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code.
However, the defendant has not submitted a document of the nature specified in Article 68 of the Enforcement and
Bankruptcy Code and has failed to prove his defense. Furthermore, although the defendant argued during the trial that his
tenancy was inconsequential because he was a doorman and that the lease was signed without his knowledge, he cannot
amend or expand his objection, except for certain exceptions. In this case, the court must accept the request, lift the objection,
continue the legal proceedings, and evict the defendant from the leased property.
2-) GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE COURT OF APPEALS ON LAW 2018/13-602 E., 2019/218 K.;
“…During the discussions held in the General Assembly of the Law, the opinion put forward that the condition of notification is
clearly stipulated in Article 67 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law, the legal qualifications of the notification and the
manner in which it should be made are strictly stipulated in the legislation, the limitation periods are related to public order
and will only become effective within the framework of the provisions to be determined by the legislator, and therefore, being
informed of the objection through a lawsuit for the removal of the objection cannot be considered as the notification required
by the legislator, was appropriate in the reversal decision of the Special Chamber and that the provision of resistance should
be overturned, was not adopted by the majority of the Assembly.
For all these reasons, since no error was found in the written decision of the local court, it was also considered that the date of
the case, which should have been 09.09.2011 in the title section of the reasoned decision regarding the resistance, was
mistakenly shown as 12.03.2014, and this constituted a material error that could always be remedied on the spot. Therefore,
the decision to resist in accordance with the procedure and law had to be approved.
3-) COURT OF APPEALS 12TH CIVIL CHAMBER E. 1996/7700 K. 1996/7946 T. 6.6.1996 (Court of
Appeals Decision on the Credit Agreements and the Account Statements Related to Them Being
Documents Written in EBL 68);
“…It is inappropriate to issue a written decision without investigating the issues mentioned above and without explaining the decision
on the spot, considering when the account statement issued to the debtor was notified pursuant to Article 68/b of the EBL, if it was
notified, whether the debtor objected to it in a timely manner, and if the objection was made in a timely manner, the loan agreements
and the related account statements are among the documents specified in Article 68 of the EBL, and that in this case, an expert
examination would not be necessary…”
4-) COURT OF APPEALS 12TH CIVIL CHAMBER E. 2002/15448 K. 2002/15291 T. 11.7.2002 (Court of Appeals
Decision on the Requirement of a Special Provision Regarding the Documents Prepared by the Authorized
Authorities to Be Subject to Enforcement Proceedings Without Judgement by Being Among the Documents
Listed in Enforcement Proceedings Law 68/1);
“…If the pursuit of a creditor whose claim is being objected to pursuant to Article 68/1 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code is based on a
document containing a signed acknowledgment and a debt acknowledgement attested by a notary, or a receipt or document issued by official
bodies or competent authorities within their authority and in accordance with the procedure, the creditor may request the removal of the
objection. In the specific case, the creditor has not submitted a document bearing the debtor’s signature and acknowledging the debt. For the
documents issued by the competent authorities, as specified in Article 68/1 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code, to be used as the basis
for enforcement proceedings and subject to non-judgment enforcement proceedings, a special provision is required in the law stipulating that
these documents are among those listed in Article 68 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code. (Such as Article 37 of Law No. 634, Law No.
143/2, 105/1, 251/1, and Law No. 634). Therefore, the decision on whether the receivable will be collected requires a trial, and accepting, rather
than rejecting, the request for the removal of the objection is inappropriate…”
5-) COURT OF APPEALS 12TH CIVIL CHAMBER E. 2015/23823 K. 2016/235 T. 11.1.2016 (Court of Appeals
Decision that the Mutual Abrogation Agreement is one of the documents listed in EBL 68);
“…Pursuant to Article 68/1 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code, if the objection is based on a document containing a signed
acknowledgement or a debt acknowledgement certified by a notary, or a receipt or document issued by official bodies or competent
authorities within their authority and in accordance with the procedure, the creditor may request the removal of the objection. In the
specific case, the document titled “Abrogation Agreement” dated October 31, 2014, on which the creditor bases his/her objection,
contains an unconditional, specific acknowledgment of a monetary debt. Since the signature on the document was not explicitly
denied in the objection filed with the enforcement office, the document in question qualifies as a document falling within the scope of
Article 68 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code. In this case, since the debtor cannot prove payment of the debt with a document
of the same nature, the court should have decided to remove the objection definitively, but it is inappropriate to rule dismissing the
request with written justification….”
6-) COURT OF APPEALS 12TH CIVIL CHAMBER E. 2014/16288 K. 2014/18982 T. 30.6.2014 (Court of Appeals
Decision that Assignment of Claim, Settlement, Discharge and Waiver Agreement are among the
Documents Listed in EBL 68);
“…In the present case, the document supporting the proceeding is titled “Assignment of Receivable, Settlement, Discharge, and Waiver Agreement.” The
document clearly states the subject of the debt, the amount to be paid by the debtor to the creditor, and the payment dates. It is understood that the
agreement was signed by the parties, and that the debtor did not object to his signature on the document in his petition of objection. Therefore, the
document subject to the proceeding does not impose reciprocal obligations, contrary to what the court has accepted, but rather contains an
unconditional acknowledgement of debt, the signature of which is acknowledged within the scope of Article 68/1 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy
Code (EBL), as explained above. In this case, the creditor has substantiated the receivable subject to the proceeding with one of the documents listed in
Article 68/1 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code (EBL) and an expert report, but the debtor has failed to substantiate his objection to the debt with a
document of the same nature. Therefore, while the court should have ruled to definitively lift the objection, the rejection of the request on the grounds of
inappropriateness is incorrect…”
The Importance of Legal Support
Cases for the removal of objections require technical knowledge, legislative expertise, and in-depth
expertise in judicial practices. While the legal provisions are clear, each case has its own unique
circumstances, and even a small mistake can lead to loss of rights. Therefore, working with an
experienced attorney from the outset is crucial to determining the right strategy, protecting your
rights, and achieving the swiftest resolution.
It’s important to remember that every step taken during the litigation process has legal and financial implications.
A professional lawyer will guide you not only in preparing the petition but also in gathering evidence,
representing the court, negotiating, and pursuing potential alternative solutions.
In order not to risk your rights and to manage the process safely, it is recommended that you consult a specialist
lawyer.