Introduction
A letter of guarantee may occupy a single page, yet it can determine the immediate allocation of millions of euros before the parties have resolved the underlying dispute. A beneficiary expects liquidity. An applicant expects the beneficiary to call only for a contractually proper reason. The bank expects to decide from the instrument and the presented documents, not from a construction claim, an expert report or a contested account. Sound advice begins by keeping those three relationships analytically separate.
Turkish legislation does not contain a single comprehensive statute entitled the Bank Guarantees Act. The legal framework is assembled from freedom of contract, the undertaking for the act of a third person in Article 128 of the Turkish Code of Obligations, the good-faith rule, procedural law on interim measures, sector-specific rules and the wording selected by the parties.1
For foreign companies, translation is not enough. A guarantee issued through a Turkish bank or counter-guarantee chain must be reviewed as an operative payment instrument. The governing law, jurisdiction, presentation route, local holidays, currency, expiry and release process should be tested against the commercial timetable before issuance.
1. Legal Nature of a Turkish Bank Guarantee
1.1 The Three-Party Structure
The usual transaction contains three separate legal relationships. The applicant and beneficiary have an underlying contract. The applicant and bank have a reimbursement or facility relationship. The bank issues the letter to the beneficiary. In cross-border practice, an instructing bank may add a counter-guarantee and request a Turkish bank to issue the local instrument. A dispute in one relationship does not automatically determine rights in another.
The Court of Cassation's 1967 unification judgment is the foundational authority. It treated the bank's undertaking as a guarantee connected with the act of a third person, while recognizing the commercial function of a direct payment promise.2
The 1969 unification judgment confirmed the separate legal character of the bank's undertaking. These authorities continue to frame the modern analysis, although every dispute still turns on the actual text and transaction.3
1.2 Independence Is a Rule of Construction
An independent guarantee ordinarily prevents the bank from importing defences from the underlying contract. The beneficiary should not have to prove the applicant's breach in full before payment. The applicant's remedy for a disputed call is usually directed against the beneficiary under the underlying contract after payment, unless the exceptional basis for urgent restraint is established.4
Independence is not absolute abstraction from all facts. The bank remains entitled and obliged to apply the guarantee's own conditions. If the instrument requires a signed statement, a specified certificate, presentation through a named bank, receipt before a deadline or delivery of the original, those requirements form part of the independent promise. The safest formulation is therefore that the guarantee is independent of the underlying merits but governed strictly by its own terms.
1.3 Guarantee or Suretyship
A suretyship is accessory to the principal debt and is subject to statutory form and protection rules. An independent guarantee creates a separate risk obligation. Labels such as guarantee, bond, surety or teminat mektubu are relevant but not conclusive. A court examines whether payment depends on the existence and enforceability of the principal debt, or instead on conditions stated in an autonomous promise.5
Drafting that repeatedly conditions liability on a final determination of breach may pull the instrument toward an accessory undertaking. Drafting that requires only a compliant written demand points in the opposite direction. Parties should decide which commercial result they want instead of combining incompatible formulas.
2. The First Demand Principle
2.1 What First Demand Means
A first demand guarantee obliges the bank to pay when the beneficiary makes a demand that complies with the instrument. Phrases such as unconditional, irrevocable, without protest and without requiring a court judgment reinforce independence, but they do not erase express documentary conditions or expiry.
The bank does not determine who should ultimately win the underlying dispute. Its review is generally documentary and facial. The bank should verify the identity and authority of the presenter, the guarantee number, the amount, the place and time of presentation, required statements, required documents, signatures and any agreed authentication channel. Payment outside the guarantee's terms can expose the bank to the applicant.
2.2 Strict Compliance and Commercial Reasonableness
Turkish law does not turn every typographical difference into a legitimate refusal. The correct question is whether the demand satisfies the substantive conditions of the undertaking. A missing statement that defines the payment trigger is materially different from a harmless discrepancy that creates no doubt about the guarantee, presenter, amount or claimed default.
A guarantee should state expressly whether the original document must accompany the demand. The Court of Cassation has held that a bank guarantee is not a negotiable instrument and that loss of the original does not, by itself, extinguish the beneficiary's right where the wording did not make original presentation a condition.6
2.3 Incorporating URDG 758
International parties frequently incorporate the ICC Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees. URDG 758 offers a recognized framework for examination, presentation, rejection, expiry, force majeure and counter-guarantees. It does not apply automatically under Turkish law. The instrument should identify the rules and address any intended variations expressly.7
The parties should also avoid assuming that incorporation of international rules selects governing law or a court. Those questions should be answered separately. A Turkish issuing bank, a foreign counter-guarantor and an overseas beneficiary may otherwise face parallel arguments about the law governing each undertaking.
3. Main Types of Bank Guarantee
3.1 Bid Security
Bid security protects the contracting authority or employer against withdrawal, failure to execute the contract or failure to provide the required performance security. In private tenders, the amount and call events are contractual. In public procurement, mandatory forms and statutory rules should be followed without creative redrafting.
Under Public Procurement Law No. 4734, bid security is generally not less than 3% of the offered price, while performance security is generally 6% of the contract price. Additional security can arise in specified circumstances. The tender documents, current standard forms and any sector-specific procurement regime must be checked for the individual tender.8
3.2 Performance Guarantees
A performance guarantee supports due performance of the awarded contract. Its economic life may extend beyond physical completion into provisional acceptance, final acceptance, warranty or defects liability. The release mechanism should identify the person authorized to release, the required certificate, partial reduction rules and the consequence of delay.
For contractors, an open-ended release process creates hidden financing cost. For beneficiaries, automatic reduction without reference to outstanding defects may remove protection too early. A carefully calibrated reduction schedule is often more balanced than an all-or-nothing expiry.
3.3 Advance Payment Guarantees
An advance payment guarantee secures repayment of an unearned advance. It should normally reduce as the advance is amortized through certified work or delivered goods. The underlying contract, payment certificates and guarantee must use the same reduction logic. If one document provides automatic reduction and another requires beneficiary confirmation, a dispute is likely.
3.4 Payment, Customs and Other Guarantees
Payment guarantees secure purchase prices, rent, energy charges or other monetary obligations. Customs guarantees support duties and related liabilities. Retention, warranty and maintenance guarantees address risks after delivery. Each instrument should be tailored to its risk instead of recycling a performance guarantee with a different heading.
4. Drafting the Guarantee
The quality of the guarantee is determined before it is issued. Once a dispute begins, parties are largely confined to the language already agreed. The drafting exercise should be managed as part of the main contract, not delegated at the end to an administrative team.
Parties and capacity. Use full legal names, registration details and addresses. Define whether successors and permitted assignees may benefit.
Amount and drawings. State a maximum amount, currency, rules for interest and costs, and whether partial or multiple drawings are permitted.
Underlying transaction. Identify the secured contract precisely, but avoid language that unintentionally makes the bank decide the underlying merits.
Demand trigger. State the exact written declaration and supporting documents required for a call. Avoid undefined concepts such as satisfactory proof.
Presentation. Specify the address, delivery channel, authentication method, business hours and effect of receipt. Coordinate paper and electronic presentation.
Expiry. Use a clear date or objectively determinable event. Address extensions, holidays, force majeure and the last time for presentation.
Reduction and release. Provide measurable reduction and release steps. Avoid leaving cancellation solely to an unavailable or unidentified signatory.
Governing framework. Address Turkish law, jurisdiction or arbitration, service, language, URDG 758 if selected, sanctions and currency controls.
5. Fraud and Manifest Abuse of Right
The principal limit on an otherwise compliant first demand is the rule against manifest abuse of rights in Article 2 of the Turkish Civil Code. The exception is narrow because easy restraint would destroy the liquidity function for which the beneficiary bargained.9
A genuine disagreement about delay, defects, variation valuation, termination or set-off is ordinarily insufficient. Those issues usually require evidence and adjudication under the underlying contract. The stronger case involves an immediately demonstrable circumstance, such as a demand after an unambiguous expiry, a call by a person who is not the beneficiary, a demand exceeding the remaining amount, fabricated documents, or a call that contradicts indisputable documentary facts and has no plausible connection to the secured risk.
The adjective manifest matters. If the court must conduct a full trial of the construction account to decide whether the call is abusive, the case is unlikely to fit the exceptional control at the payment stage. The underlying claim can still be litigated after payment.
6. Interim Injunctions and Emergency Strategy
An applicant may seek an interim injunction where delay threatens serious harm and the claimed right is shown on a prima facie basis. The court considers the precise relief requested, the evidence, proportionality and the independent function of the guarantee. Security may be ordered to protect the respondent against loss caused by an unjustified measure.10
Timing is critical. Turkish procedural law imposes short periods both for seeking implementation of an injunction and, where the measure was granted before the main action, for commencing the merits case. Counsel should prepare the main claim, translations, corporate authorities, guarantee, demand, underlying contract and decisive contemporaneous documents at the same time as the urgent application.11
An order directed only to the beneficiary may not solve a payment problem if the bank is not properly bound or notified. Conversely, an overbroad request that ignores the bank's separate obligation may be refused. The requested measure, defendants, competent court, arbitration clause and any emergency arbitrator mechanism require coordinated analysis.
7. Making and Examining a Demand
7.1 Beneficiary Checklist
The beneficiary should read the guarantee as a presentation checklist, not as a summary of the underlying contract. The demand should be prepared early, especially if signatures, legalization, bank transmission or original documents are required.
Exposure. Confirm the remaining amount, currency, expiry date and any reduction already effective.
Identification. Use the precise addressee, guarantee number and applicant details stated in the instrument.
Wording. Repeat the required declaration faithfully, including any statement that the applicant failed to perform.
Documents. Attach every required document and the original only where the guarantee requires it or prudent arrangements call for it.
Delivery. Deliver through the specified channel before the deadline and retain authenticated evidence of receipt.
Court of Cassation authority demonstrates why the wording matters. In a 2012 decision, the Court treated the required statement of non-performance as material. A demand that merely asserted that the risk had arisen did not necessarily satisfy language requiring a statement that the guaranteed party had failed to perform its obligation.12
7.2 Bank Checklist
The issuing bank should establish a controlled examination record. It should capture the time of receipt, method of authentication, authority of the signer, guarantee balance, expiry, demanded sum, required statements and documents, apparent alterations and any court order. If refusing, it should identify the discrepancy promptly and precisely. A generic refusal creates avoidable litigation risk.
8. Expiry, Extension and Return of the Original
A fixed-term guarantee should say whether the bank is released automatically unless a written demand reaches it before expiry. Article 128(2) and the 2019 Court of Cassation judgment are particularly relevant to that wording. Parties should distinguish the date of demand, the date of receipt and any deadline for supporting documents.13
Evergreen clauses and extend-or-pay mechanisms should be drafted with care. The notice period for non-extension must give the beneficiary a realistic choice. The applicant should calendar notice dates and bank facility renewals. A demand made solely because an extension was not delivered may still be valid if the guarantee expressly permits it.
Return of the original is useful evidence of release, but it should not be confused with the legal existence of the bank's obligation. If return is intended as a condition for cancellation or demand, the guarantee should say so. Silence invites disagreement when the document is lost.
9. Payment, Reimbursement and Recovery
After a compliant payment, the bank ordinarily debits or claims reimbursement from the applicant under their facility or counter-indemnity. In a counter-guarantee structure, the Turkish issuing bank may claim from the foreign bank under a separate instrument. Defences must be assessed relationship by relationship.
If the beneficiary was not entitled to retain the proceeds under the underlying contract, the applicant may pursue contractual damages, restitution or other agreed remedies. Unjust enrichment can be relevant, but the available cause of action, limitation period, governing law and dispute forum depend on the facts and the contract.14
Limitation should not be confused with expiry. The general ten-year period under Article 146 may govern some contractual claims where no special period applies, but it does not revive a guarantee that required timely presentation before an agreed expiry. Notices, acknowledgements, proceedings and interruption rules require separate review.15
10. Cross-Border Guarantees and Counter-Guarantees
A foreign applicant often asks its relationship bank to issue a counter-guarantee in favour of a Turkish bank, which then issues the local guarantee. The two instruments may have different laws, courts, expiry dates, currencies and documentary conditions. Counsel should map the entire chain, not review only the document delivered to the beneficiary.16
Expiry buffer. Allow sufficient time between the local guarantee's expiry and the counter-guarantee's expiry for a complying reimbursement demand.
Financial terms. Align currency, maximum liability, interest, charges and exchange-rate allocation throughout the chain.
Presentation mechanics. Confirm message authentication, correspondent channels and business-day calendars in each relevant country.
Regulatory risk. Allocate sanctions, illegality, licensing and force majeure risk expressly. A general compliance clause may not resolve a payment conflict.
Dispute architecture. Review governing law and forum for the local guarantee, counter-guarantee, reimbursement agreement and underlying contract separately.
11. Public Procurement and Electronic Guarantees
Public procurement is form-sensitive. A bidder should use the current standard form and verify the electronic or physical submission route in the tender documents. Deviations that may appear commercially harmless can affect bid validity. The procurement calendar should also include renewal, additional performance security and release after acceptance.
Turkey continued expanding electronic guarantee infrastructure in 2026. The Ministry of Justice announced work to reduce physical-document use and integrate electronic bank guarantees into judicial processes. The initiative improves traceability, but it does not dispense with authority, authenticity, scope and expiry checks.17
For customs guarantees, the Ministry of Trade opened the Teminat Bilgi Sistemi to obligors and representatives on 6 February 2026. The system provides access to information such as type, status, date, amount, balance, linked declarations, customs office and issuing bank. Businesses should reconcile system data with bank records and internal exposure schedules.18
12. Practical Risk Allocation
12.1 Applicant Perspective
Control the trigger. Negotiate objective call triggers in the underlying contract and matching demand language in the guarantee.
Manage the calendar. Track expiry, extension, reduction and release as treasury obligations, not only legal milestones.
Build the evidence file. Preserve signed certificates, notices, acceptance records, payment data and correspondence needed for emergency relief or later recovery.
Price the exposure. Model commission, collateral, foreign exchange and delayed-release costs for the full realistic life of the instrument.
Plan for a call. Prepare an escalation protocol so treasury, project management, the bank and Turkish counsel can act within hours of a threatened demand.
12.2 Beneficiary Perspective
Confirm the issuer. Verify the issuing bank, authority of signatories or electronic authentication, and any branch limitation.
Match the commercial need. Require an amount, currency, expiry and presentation process that match the real risk period.
Preserve independence. Avoid conditions that require the bank to interpret technical performance disputes.
Protect presentation. Calendar expiry and prepare the demand before the final day. Test courier, SWIFT or electronic presentation in advance.
Assess credit risk. Treat a bank guarantee as credit exposure to the issuer and, where relevant, consider confirmation or a stronger bank.
13. When a Foreign Company Should Instruct Turkish Counsel
Turkish counsel should be involved before issuance where the guarantee supports a major tender, construction project, acquisition, energy arrangement, supply contract or regulated transaction. Early review can align the guarantee with the underlying contract, procurement form, dispute clause and treasury facility. It can also identify Turkish-law language that a foreign template misses.
Urgent advice is required when a call is threatened, made or rejected. A useful instruction package contains the executed guarantee, amendments, demand, proof of receipt, underlying contract, key notices, project chronology, evidence said to establish abuse, bank communications, corporate authorities and translations. The first legal question is not whether the applicant believes it performed. It is what the guarantee requires and whether the evidence supports immediate relief.
A foreign company searching for a bank guarantee lawyer in Turkey should ask whether counsel has experience with independent guarantees, urgent injunctions, Court of Cassation practice, public procurement, banking operations, enforcement and cross-border counter-guarantees. The engagement should define who is responsible for bank communication, court filing, translations, service, arbitration coordination and the main recovery claim.
14. Court of Cassation Approach
The leading line of authority is coherent when read carefully. The unification judgments establish the autonomous guarantee framework. Later decisions focus on the instrument's text. The bank may not import the applicant's ordinary contractual defences, yet the beneficiary must still comply with the stated conditions. Fixed-term language, a required declaration of non-performance and an express original-document condition can therefore be decisive.
The reported decisions do not support a universal formula that every bank guarantee is payable on any request bearing the beneficiary's name. Nor do they support routine injunctions whenever the underlying contract is disputed. The disciplined approach is text first, independence second, manifest abuse only as an exceptional control, and merits litigation in the agreed forum.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can an applicant stop payment because it disputes the underlying breach?
Usually not. A first demand guarantee is intended to separate immediate payment from the final resolution of the underlying dispute. An injunction requires a specific legal basis and strong evidence, often directed to a facial defect, expiry, fraud or manifest abuse rather than a merely arguable defence on the merits.
Must the beneficiary prove its loss to the issuing bank?
Only if the guarantee requires proof of loss or a specified supporting document. A pure first demand guarantee generally requires the written demand and declarations stated in the instrument, not a final court award or full accounting of damages.
How fast must a Turkish bank pay?
The guarantee and any incorporated rules govern the examination period. The bank should act within the agreed period and respond promptly. A beneficiary should not assume a universal number of days, and an applicant should treat every valid demand as urgent.
Does the original letter always have to be presented?
No. The Court of Cassation has recognized that a guarantee letter is not a negotiable instrument and that loss of the original does not automatically extinguish the right. If original presentation is intended as a payment condition, the text should say so clearly.
Does returning the original automatically release the bank?
Return is strong practical evidence of release, but its legal effect depends on the wording and surrounding agreement. A written release or cancellation confirmation is safer, particularly for electronic or amended guarantees.
Is a performance guarantee released when physical work is complete?
Not necessarily. The underlying contract may require provisional or final acceptance, correction of defects, release certificates or expiry of a warranty period. Public contracts may impose additional formal steps. The guarantee should be monitored until legal release, not only practical completion.
Can a demand be made on the last day?
Only if it reaches the correct place, through the permitted channel and within the stated time. Dispatch before expiry may be insufficient where receipt is required. Local business hours and holidays should be checked.
What should a foreign company ask a bank guarantee lawyer in Turkey?
Ask for a text-based opinion on the guarantee, a map of the underlying and bank relationships, Court of Cassation analysis, an emergency timetable, evidence requirements, forum and service advice, and a strategy for recovery after payment. Counsel should also coordinate with the bank and any foreign arbitration team.
Conclusion
A Turkish bank letter of guarantee is effective because it shifts the timing of risk. The beneficiary receives a direct bank promise; the applicant ordinarily litigates the underlying dispute after a complying call. That commercial result depends on independence, but independence operates together with strict attention to the guarantee's own amount, trigger, documents, presentation route and expiry.
The most reliable strategy is preventive. Draft the guarantee and underlying contract together, map any counter-guarantee chain, choose governing rules deliberately, test the demand mechanics, calendar every deadline and preserve the evidence required for both urgent relief and later recovery. Once a call is made, time and wording usually matter more than broad statements about fairness.
Bibliography and Official References
Legislation and Official Rules
Republic of Türkiye, Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098, particularly arts. 26, 77 to 82, 128, 146 and 581 to 603. Available at: https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuatmetin/1.5.6098.pdf accessed 22 September 2026.
Republic of Türkiye, Turkish Civil Code No. 4721, particularly art. 2. Available at: https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuatmetin/1.5.4721.pdf accessed 22 September 2026.
Republic of Türkiye, Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100, particularly arts. 389 to 399. Available at: https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuatmetin/1.5.6100.pdf accessed 22 September 2026.
Republic of Türkiye, Public Procurement Law No. 4734, particularly arts. 33, 34 and 43. Available at: https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/mevzuatmetin/1.5.4734.pdf accessed 22 September 2026.
International Chamber of Commerce, Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees, URDG 758, ICC Publication No. 758, 2010.
Court of Cassation Decisions
Court of Cassation Joint Chambers for Unification of Judgments, E. 1966/16, K. 1967/7, 13 December 1967, Official Gazette No. 12867, 5 April 1968; official case-law search portal. Available at: https://karararama.yargitay.gov.tr/ accessed 22 September 2026.
Court of Cassation Grand General Assembly for Unification of Judgments, E. 1969/4, K. 1969/6, 11 June 1969; official case-law search portal. Available at: https://karararama.yargitay.gov.tr/ accessed 22 September 2026.
Court of Cassation, 11th Civil Chamber, E. 2011/92, K. 2012/16721, 22 October 2012; official case-law search portal. Available at: https://karararama.yargitay.gov.tr/ accessed 22 September 2026.
Court of Cassation, 11th Civil Chamber, E. 2017/2572, K. 2019/2649, 4 April 2019; official case-law search portal. Available at: https://karararama.yargitay.gov.tr/ accessed 22 September 2026.
Official Institutional Materials
Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Justice, 'Banka Teminat Mektupları Elektronikleşiyor', 29 May 2026. Available at: https://www.adalet.gov.tr/banka-teminat-mektuplari-elektroniklesiyor accessed 22 September 2026.
Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Trade, 'Teminat Bilgi Sisteminin Yükümlülerin Kullanıma Açılmasına İlişkin Basın Duyurusu', 7 February 2026. Available at: https://ticaret.gov.tr/duyurular/teminat-bilgi-sisteminin-yukumlulerin-kullanima-acilmasina-iliskin-basin-duyurusu accessed 22 September 2026.
Public Procurement Authority, official legislation and electronic public procurement resources. Available at: https://www.kik.gov.tr/ accessed 22 September 2026.
Selected Legal Books
Reisoğlu, Seza. Banka Teminat Mektupları ve Kontrgarantiler. 4th revised and expanded ed. Ankara, 2003.
Barlas, Nami. Türk Hukuk Sisteminde Banka Teminat Mektupları. Istanbul, 1986.
Doğan, Vahit. Teminat Mektupları. Ankara, 2015.
Önder, B. Türk Hukuku'nda Banka Teminat Mektupları. Ankara, 2019.
Footnotes
1 Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098, arts. 26 and 128. Turkish doctrine and settled case law generally analyse an independent bank letter of guarantee as an atypical guarantee contract involving an undertaking for the act of a third person.
2 Court of Cassation Joint Chambers for Unification of Judgments, E. 1966/16, K. 1967/7, 13 December 1967, Official Gazette No. 12867, 5 April 1968.
3 Court of Cassation Grand General Assembly for Unification of Judgments, E. 1969/4, K. 1969/6, 11 June 1969.
4 Seza Reisoğlu, Banka Teminat Mektupları ve Kontrgarantiler, 4th revised and expanded ed. (Ankara, 2003); Nami Barlas, Türk Hukuk Sisteminde Banka Teminat Mektupları (Istanbul, 1986).
5 Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098, arts. 581 to 603, governing suretyship. The classification of an instrument depends on its text and commercial function, not its title.
6 Court of Cassation, 11th Civil Chamber, E. 2017/2572, K. 2019/2649, 4 April 2019. The judgment addresses Article 128, fixed-term wording and the legal effect of a lost original where the guarantee did not make presentation of the original a payment condition.
7 International Chamber of Commerce, Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees, URDG 758, ICC Publication No. 758 (2010). URDG 758 applies only where the guarantee incorporates it.
8 Public Procurement Law No. 4734, particularly arts. 33, 34 and 43. The statutory baseline is bid security of not less than 3% of the offered price and performance security generally calculated at 6% of the contract price, subject to the current law, tender documents and rules on additional performance security.
9 Turkish Civil Code No. 4721, art. 2, requiring good faith and denying legal protection to the manifest abuse of a right.
10 Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100, arts. 389, 390 and 392. An applicant must establish the statutory grounds for provisional relief on a prima facie basis and may be required to provide security.
11 Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100, arts. 393 and 397. Separate short periods govern requesting implementation of an injunction and filing the main action where relief was obtained before suit.
12 Court of Cassation, 11th Civil Chamber, E. 2011/92, K. 2012/16721, 22 October 2012. The Court treated compliance with the demand wording as material, including a statement that the guaranteed party had failed to perform the secured obligation.
13 Court of Cassation, 11th Civil Chamber, E. 2017/2572, K. 2019/2649, 4 April 2019; Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098, art. 128(2), on a time-limited undertaking that provides for release unless a written demand is received before expiry.
14 Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098, arts. 77 to 82 on unjust enrichment, without prejudice to contractual damages and other remedies under the governing contract.
15 Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098, art. 146. The general ten-year limitation period does not replace a contractual expiry or presentation condition in the guarantee itself.
16 Vahit Doğan, Teminat Mektupları (Ankara, 2015); B. Önder, Türk Hukuku'nda Banka Teminat Mektupları (Ankara, 2019).
17 Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Justice, 'Banka Teminat Mektupları Elektronikleşiyor', 29 May 2026, concerning the expansion of electronic guarantee infrastructure in judicial processes.
18 Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Trade, 'Teminat Bilgi Sisteminin Yükümlülerin Kullanıma Açılmasına İlişkin Basın Duyurusu', 7 February 2026, concerning electronic access to information on guarantees processed by customs administrations.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
