For people who, as a result of enforcement proceedings, had to make a payment even though they were not debtors, or who paid an amount they did not actually owe, one of the legal remedies available is the action for restitution (istirdat davası).

An action for restitution is a type of lawsuit that seeks the return of a payment where it later turns out that money paid because of enforcement proceedings was not actually owed. This lawsuit is not merely a money claim; it is a special legal remedy aimed at making good a loss of assets that occurred unjustly.

Especially for people who had to pay under the threat of enforcement, the action for restitution is an important means of protecting the right of ownership and economic interests.

What Is an Action for Restitution?

The Turkish word “istirdat” literally means “taking back”. In legal terms, an action for restitution is a lawsuit in which a person who paid within enforcement proceedings although they did not owe the debt asks for the amount paid to be returned.

The main purpose of this type of lawsuit, regulated in Article 72 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (İİK), is to make good the loss suffered by the debtor because they had to pay a debt that did not actually exist.

The Difference Between a Negative Declaratory Action and an Action for Restitution

The action for restitution is often confused with the negative declaratory action (menfi tespit davası). However, there is an important difference between these two lawsuits.

In a negative declaratory action, the aim is to establish that the person does not owe the debt before any payment is made. In an action for restitution, the payment has already been made and the aim is to get the payment back.

In other words, before payment, a negative declaratory action is used to establish that no debt exists; after payment, an action for restitution is used to get the money back.

When Can an Action for Restitution Be Filed?

For an action for restitution to be filed, a payment must first have been made within enforcement proceedings. However, not every payment can be the subject of an action for restitution. It must be shown that the payment was not based on a legally valid debt, or that the debtor in fact had no obligation to pay.

In practice, situations that may be the subject of an action for restitution include payment of a debt that did not actually exist, payment made as a result of proceedings based on forged or invalid documents, collection of a debt again even though it had already been paid, or payment of an incorrectly calculated claim.

Payments Made Under the Threat of Enforcement

In enforcement proceedings, some people may have to pay in order to avoid attachment or to prevent greater losses.

However, having made a payment does not always mean that the debt has been accepted. After paying, the person can ask for the payment to be returned by proving that they did not owe the debt.

The Time Limit in an Action for Restitution

The time limit is an important element of an action for restitution. Under the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law, a person who paid although they did not owe the debt must exercise the right to sue within a certain period from the date of payment.

In practice, one of the points that requires the most attention in actions for restitution is the one-year time limit for bringing the claim (hak düşürücü süre). If this period is missed, there can be significant consequences for the right to sue.

The Burden of Proof in an Action for Restitution

In an action for restitution, the claimant must first show that they made the payment and that the debt was not actually theirs.

In its assessment, the court looks not only at the enforcement file but also at the underlying legal relationship between the parties, contracts, payment documents, commercial records and other evidence.

For this reason, in actions for restitution, the claim “I did not owe anything” alone may not be enough. It is important to support the claim with concrete documents.

Recovering Money Collected Unjustly

Every payment that leaves a person’s assets must be based on a legally valid reason. If a payment was not based on a genuine debt or was made as a result of wrongful proceedings, the legal order makes it possible to make good this loss.

At this point, the action for restitution is an important legal tool that ensures the economic value obtained unjustly is returned to the true right holder.

Points to Consider in an Action for Restitution

In actions for restitution, the history of the enforcement file, the date of payment, the method of payment and the nature of the relationship between the parties are of great importance.

In particular, the source of the debt that was the subject of the enforcement proceedings must be examined correctly, because in some cases the problem may stem not only from the enforcement file but from the main contract or commercial relationship between the parties.

Actions for Restitution for Companies

For commercial businesses, unjustified payments can cause significant financial losses. Especially with high-value commercial claims, wrongful or unfounded proceedings can adversely affect a business’s cash flow.

For this reason, it is important for companies to assess enforcement processes in all their aspects, not only at the payment stage but also before and after the proceedings.

The Importance of the Legal Process in Recovering the Amount Paid

Actions for restitution are not simply about asking for a payment back. The legal ground on which the lawsuit is based, the evidence that will be used and how the process is conducted can directly affect the outcome.

People who paid although they did not owe the debt need to assess the payment process and the enforcement file carefully to avoid losing their rights.