Obtaining a judgment in Austria is only the first step if the debtor or assets are in Türkiye. To use the judgment for compulsory execution in Türkiye, the creditor generally needs an enforcement order from a Turkish court. Türkiye and Austria have a bilateral convention that provides the treaty basis for reciprocity, subject to the Convention’s scope and the judgment’s date.

Which treaty applies?

The Türkiye–Austria Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Court Judgments was signed on 23 May 1989. Türkiye approved it by Law No. 3727 of 8 May 1991. Although it was published in the Official Gazette on 23 September 1991, the Turkish Ministry of Justice lists its entry into force as 1 November 1992. Article 17 applies the Convention to judgments given after its entry into force. A judgment from before that date requires a separate review of the treaty framework in force at the time.

Read the Convention · Ministry of Justice treaty records

For judgments covered by the Convention, the treaty meets the reciprocity requirement in Article 54(1)(a) of Turkish Private International and Procedural Law (Law No. 5718, MÖHUK). This addresses only one part of the enforcement analysis.

Examples from Turkish Court of Cassation practice

In a commercial debt case, the 11th Civil Chamber upheld the appellate judgment on 25 October 2022 (File No. 2021/1832, Decision No. 2022/7401). The lower appellate court had relied on the agreement and reciprocity between Türkiye and Austria. Decision text

On 31 May 2023, the same Chamber considered enforcement of a Steyr Regional Court judgment for EUR 270,987.87 (File No. 2022/6677, Decision No. 2023/3391). The dispute had previously been remitted because a retrial application in Austria raised a question about finality. After the status of the Austrian proceedings was clarified, the Court upheld enforcement, correcting the court fee. Decision text

The 2nd Civil Chamber’s decisions of 4 May 2023 also concern Austrian judgments: one addressed property division and compensation (File No. 2023/1377, Decision No. 2023/2153); the other concerned child maintenance (File No. 2022/10349, Decision No. 2023/2205). In both, reciprocity was accepted in the lower-court reasoning and did not defeat enforcement. Property case · Maintenance case

Practical points for an enforcement application

Confirm that the judgment is final and enforceable in Austria, and obtain appropriate evidence of that status.
Prepare an authenticated copy and a proper Turkish translation of the judgment and supporting documents.
Review the Convention’s jurisdiction rules and the defendant’s notice and opportunity to be heard.
Assess public policy and any other objection under the Convention and MÖHUK.
Check that the judgment falls within the Convention’s temporal and subject-matter scope.

A 2010 decision of the 2nd Civil Chamber states that the Convention was in force, but the case concerned recognition of a divorce judgment. Because reciprocity under Article 54(1)(a) is not required for recognition under Article 58 MÖHUK, it should not be treated as a decision resolving all enforcement requirements. Decision text

Arbitral awards, including awards issued under VIAC rules, are subject to a different enforcement regime and should not be confused with foreign court judgments.

Conclusion

Enforcement of qualifying Austrian court judgments in Türkiye is supported by the bilateral Convention and Court of Cassation practice. The applicant should build the case around the specific judgment: its date, scope, finality, enforceability, jurisdictional basis and procedural history.

About the author

Av. Dr. Gökhan Cindemir holds a doctorate in International Trade Law. His practice includes cross-border commercial disputes and Turkish proceedings for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments.