Introduction
The complex and dynamic nature of maritime trade necessitates special measures for creditors to protect their rights and secure their claims on vessels. Articles 1352 to 1381 of the Turkish Commercial Code (TCC) comprehensively regulate the application of provisional attachment on ships to secure maritime claims. These provisions provide legal protection on vessels to meet claims arising from maritime trade activities among shipowners, charterers, crew, cargo owners, and other interested parties. In maritime trade, provisional attachment functions by allowing the creditor to temporarily seize the debtor’s assets, thereby providing security during the collection process. This article will discuss how provisional attachment is applied under the TCC and its legal consequences for both the creditor and the debtor.
A. Prerequisites for Requesting Provisional Attachment of a Ship
1. Existence of a Maritime Claim:
To be able to request an arrest of a ship, it must be based on a maritime claim specified in Article 1352 of the Turkish Commercial Code (TCC). These claims may be various demands arising from the operation of the vessel. Precautionary arrest procedures are only applicable to maritime claims specified in Article 1352 of the TCC. According to this article, “maritime claim” refers to claims arising from the following situations:
a. Loss or damage caused by the operation of the vessel:
Material damages caused to the vessel or third parties during vessel operation activities are included (TCC art. 1352/1-a). The operation of the vessel includes the following situations: Port Maneuvers: While berthing or departing from the port, the vessel may cause damage to piers, quays, or other vessels. For example, material damages caused by a vessel colliding with a quay while berthing are included in this scope. Sea Traffic: Vessels carry the risk of colliding with or damaging other vessels at sea. Especially in areas with heavy sea traffic, damages arising from a vessel colliding with other vessels due to incorrect maneuvers fall within the scope of this article. Loading and Unloading Processes: Damages occurring on board or around the vessel during loading or unloading are considered loss or damage caused by the operation of the vessel. For example, damages occurring within the vessel due to incorrect loading of cargo or damages caused to other vehicles in the port are also included in this scope.
b. Loss of Life or Personal Injury:
Loss of life or other bodily injuries occurring on land or in water during ship operations can be considered within the scope of a maritime claim. According to Article 1352/1-b of the Turkish Commercial Code (TCC), deaths or injuries directly related to the operation of a ship and arising from this operational activity may be subject to compensation claims. This provision states that ship owners or operators may be held liable for bodily injuries resulting from ship operation activities. (TCC Art. 1352/1-b).
For example, in cases where both ship crew members and third parties (e.g., port workers engaged in loading or unloading, or other ship personnel) are injured or lose their lives as a result of accidents occurring while the ship is sailing or maneuvering in port, these damages are considered maritime claims. Similarly, injuries or deaths of passengers on passenger vessels are also covered.
In such cases, victims or the relatives of the deceased person may claim compensation for the damages, and this claim is evaluated within the scope of maritime commercial law. The ship owner or operator may be liable to cover these damages, and compensation for damages can be secured by applying a provisional attachment on the ship.
c. Salvage Operations:
According to Article 1352/1-c of the Turkish Commercial Code (TTK), expenses incurred during the salvage of a vessel or goods on board, salvage operations carried out for the purpose of protecting the environment, and special compensation claimed as a result of these operations are considered maritime claims. Such salvage activities are not limited solely to the protection of the vessel and its cargo but also include steps aimed at preventing environmental damage. For example, if a vessel experiences a maritime accident and poses a risk of oil spill, interventions made to protect the environment and the costs arising from these interventions fall within the scope of maritime claims. Those participating in salvage operations may claim special compensation for the services they provide, and this claim is considered a security interest on the vessel. In addition, the economic value of the salvaged vessel or cargo and the extent of environmental damage caused are among the factors affecting salvors’ claims for compensation. Particularly in maritime commerce, while such salvage operations create financial liability for shipowners, salvors’ claims are secured in line with the priority of environmental protection. (TTK Art. 1352/1-c).
d. Environmental Damages:
According to Article 1352/1-d of the TCC, damage caused by a ship to the environment, coastline, or interests in these areas, or the threat of such damage, falls within the scope of a maritime claim. All interventions made to prevent, limit, or completely eliminate environmental damage, and the expenses arising from these interventions, are also included in this scope. For example, in a situation where oil leaking from a ship spreads into the sea and harms the marine ecosystem, the costs of cleaning and repair work carried out to prevent this damage, measures taken to restore the environment, and economic losses incurred by third parties in this process constitute a maritime claim. Furthermore, compensation to be paid due to these damages is evaluated in the same way. For instance, if local fishermen or tourism businesses have suffered financial losses due to environmental damage, the damages incurred by these individuals are also covered by compensation. This regulation provides strong legal protection to creditors against potential damages in maritime trade, along with environmental protection awareness. (TCC Art. 1352/1-d).
e. Sunken Ships, Wrecks, Abandoned Vessels:
All expenses and disbursements incurred for the purpose of refloating, raising, removing, destroying, or rendering harmless a sunken, wrecked, stranded, or abandoned ship are considered maritime claims. This scope also includes things found in or previously on the ship. Furthermore, expenses incurred for the preservation of an abandoned ship and for the sustenance of seafarers (covering basic needs such as food and accommodation) also qualify as maritime claims (TCC Art. 1352/1-e).
f. Contracts related to the use or chartering of a ship:
Pursuant to Article 1352/1-f of the Turkish Commercial Code (TTK), any contract concluded for the purpose of using or chartering a vessel is considered a maritime claim. In this context, it is irrelevant whether a charter party (ship charter agreement) has been drawn up; all agreements made for chartering purposes can be subject to a maritime claim. For example, contracts for chartering a cargo ship to a commercial enterprise for a specific period or for using a passenger ship for holiday purposes grant the creditor the right to request a precautionary attachment on the vessel if the charterer fails to fulfill their payment obligations. Furthermore, the non-payment of expenses such as maintenance, repair, and fuel costs related to the chartered vessel is also considered within the scope of claims arising from such contracts. Thus, shipowners or operators provide legal protection to secure their claims in case of non-fulfillment of contract terms. (TTK Art. 1352/1-f).
g. Contracts related to the carriage of goods or passengers:
According to Article 1352/1-g of the TCC, any contract made for the purpose of carrying goods or passengers by ship, regardless of whether a charter party has been drawn up, is considered a maritime claim. Such contracts form the basis of commercial activities and relate to the ship carrying cargo or engaging in passenger transport on a specific route. For example, contracts made for chartering a cargo ship to transport containers from port to port or for a passenger ship to provide services for tourist travel fall within this scope. If the shipowner or carrier cannot receive their rights arising from the carriage of goods or passengers based on these contracts, a maritime claim arises, and the creditor may request a precautionary attachment on the ship to secure these rights. For example, damages incurred during the carriage of goods or unpaid fees resulting from passenger transport may be subject to maritime claims within this scope. (TCC Art. 1352/1-g).
h. Loss of or damage to goods carried:
According to Article 1352/1-h of the Turkish Commercial Code (TTK), damage to or loss (zıya) of any kind of goods, including luggage, transported on a ship is considered a maritime claim. Such maritime claims cover all types of physical damage, loss, or harm occurring during the carriage of cargo or luggage. For example, damage to goods in containers transported on a ship due to a maritime accident, material damages resulting from waves wetting the cargo on the ship, or damage to goods caused by dropping during loading/unloading fall within this scope. Furthermore, situations such as lost luggage or misdelivered luggage transported on board are also examples of loss and damage covered by maritime claims. In these cases, the cargo owner or consignee may claim a maritime lien on the ship to compensate for their losses and may request a provisional attachment to secure their claim. (TTK Art. 1352/1-h).
i. Claims Arising from General Average:
General average is a maritime concept that arises from extraordinary sacrifices and expenses intentionally made by the ship’s master and crew to save the ship, cargo, and voyage in a situation of peril encountered by the ship and cargo at sea. In a general average situation, the sacrifices and expenses incurred must be shared among all parties participating in the sea voyage (shipowner, cargo owner, and other interested parties).
This concept specifically includes situations such as jettisoning part of the cargo into the sea to preserve the ship or eliminate the danger, incurring emergency repair costs, or deviating from the usual route to proceed to a safe port, especially in times of peril. Such extraordinary sacrifices are referred to in maritime law as “general average”, and the incurred expenses must be fairly distributed among all stakeholders.
Claims arising from general average are considered within the scope of a maritime claim, and the vessel, cargo, or other elements of the voyage can be security for this debt. In such maritime disputes, general average claims hold an important place in maritime law and regulate the financial sharing responsibility between shipowners and cargo owners (TTK art. 1352/1-i).
j. Claims arising from towage services:
Towage is a service provided for the purpose of pulling, pushing, or guiding one vessel by another vessel. Towage services are generally used to assist large merchant vessels in maneuvering when entering or exiting narrow ports. Additionally, towage services may be resorted to in situations such as the rescue of a vessel that has lost its maneuverability at sea, the pulling of a grounded vessel, or its relocation to another place.
Claims arising from towage services are considered maritime claims. This service is considered a commercial and technical support provided to the shipowner or the vessel’s operator, and the fee payable in return for this service is a claim of the party providing the towage. The vessels used during towage operations are generally specially designed tugboats with powerful engines, and the towage operation ensures the safe pulling or pushing of the vessel.
Claims arising from towage services may cause the party providing the towage service to assert a right over the vessel, and the fees payable in return for this service are considered maritime claims. These claims are financial obligations arising from towage services provided especially in commercial ports or under dangerous sea conditions (TTK art. 1352/1-j).
k. Claims arising from pilotage services:
Piloting is a service where a pilot, well-versed in the marine conditions and waterways of that area, guides a vessel to ensure its safe navigation. Piloting service is especially provided for entering and exiting ports, passing through straits, or in narrow and dangerous waterways where vessel maneuvering is difficult. The pilot assists the ship’s captain by giving instructions on the correct course, speed, and maneuvers, thereby reducing the risk of the vessel running aground, colliding, or suffering other marine accidents.
Receivables arising from piloting services are considered maritime claims. Piloting service is commercially and legally important as it ensures the safe guidance of a vessel. This service is covered by shipowners or operators and creates a financial obligation on the vessel. Piloting is a critical service that enhances maritime navigation safety, and a pilot becomes mandatory, especially when large-tonnage commercial vessels enter congested waterways like ports or straits.
Claims arising from this service are a debt payable by shipowners or operators within the framework of maritime law, and may lead to the piloting party asserting a right over the vessel. Fees for piloting services are considered maritime claims, similar to other services rendered for the vessel (Turkish Commercial Code art. 1352/1-k).
l. All kinds of equipment services provided for the operation, management, protection, or maintenance of the vessel:
All equipment, including all kinds of goods, materials, provisions, fuel, and containers, provided for the operation, management, protection, or maintenance of the ship, is considered within the scope of a maritime claim. Such materials and services are necessary for the ship to operate smoothly, continue its commercial activities, and navigate safely at sea. Expenditures made for the maintenance and protection of the ship, such as repair costs, regular maintenance services, and the procurement of necessary equipment and tools, are considered maritime claims.
Furthermore, provisions and other living materials supplied to meet the needs of the ship’s crew, and expenses such as fuel required for the ship’s operational activities, are also included in this scope. All these services rendered and materials supplied for the ship to operate efficiently and safely are debts that must be paid by the shipowner or operator, and they constitute a maritime claim (Turkish Commercial Code Art. 1352/1-l).
m. Claims Arising from Ship Construction and Repair:
Any expenditure made for the construction, reconstruction, repair, outfitting of a ship, or for altering its characteristics, is considered a maritime claim. In this context, major construction projects, starting from the initial build phase, including the ship’s reconstruction over time or significant alterations to its existing structure, fall into this category. Furthermore, all technical and engineering services performed for the ship’s repair in accordance with sea conditions, rectification of existing damages, or its outfitting, are also included in such expenditures. (Turkish Commercial Code Art. 1352/1-m).
Such services include essential operations necessary for the vessel to continue its commercial and operational activities. Specifically, repair and maintenance work carried out for the vessel to resume voyages, the procurement of new equipment and fittings, modifications to the vessel’s structural features, or modernization efforts are considered within this scope. These services and expenditures are debts that must be paid by the shipowner or operator and are categorized as maritime liens.
n. Port, Canal, Dock, and Quay Expenses:
Port, canal, dock, pier, quay fees, and other waterway usage charges (dues) payable for the vessel, along with quarantine expenses, are considered maritime liens. These types of expenses cover mandatory expenditures incurred when the vessel enters and exits ports, passes through canals, or uses waterways during its commercial activities. Additionally, extra expenses arising from the vessel being kept under quarantine are also considered within this scope. (Turkish Commercial Code Article 1352/1-n).
Port and dock expenses include fees payable for activities such as the vessel’s berthing, and the provision of necessary services for loading and unloading operations. Canal and other waterway dues are charges paid in exchange for the vessel’s right to use waterways in specific regions. Furthermore, expenses incurred if the vessel is quarantined for health and safety reasons are also included among these types of expenditures.
These services and expenditures are mandatory for the vessel to participate in international and local maritime transport activities, and in case of non-payment of these expenses, the creditor can claim rights under the scope of a maritime lien.
o. Crew Wages:
Wages payable to seafarers for their work on board the ship are considered maritime claims. In addition, the costs of repatriating the crew to their countries and social security contributions payable on their behalf are also considered maritime claims. In this context, all payments to seafarers are included among maritime claims (Turkish Commercial Code, Article 1352/1-o).
p. Expenses Incurred on Behalf of the Ship or its Owner :
In accordance with Article 1352/1-p of the Turkish Commercial Code, any expenditure made for the operation, maintenance, preservation of the ship, or on behalf of its owner, including credits obtained for the ship, is considered a maritime claim. Such expenditures encompass all financial obligations necessary for the ship to continue its operations. For example, expenses incurred to meet the ship’s fuel needs, maintenance and repair services for the ship, port fees for the ship’s anchorage, or wages payable to the ship’s crew can be evaluated within this scope. Furthermore, loans used for the ship’s financing and their repayment are also included among expenditures made on behalf of the ship. For instance, if a shipowner has obtained a loan from a bank for ship construction or major repairs, this loan debt can constitute a maritime claim. If such expenditures are not paid, the ship’s operator may face a maritime claim on the ship, and creditors may request a provisional attachment on the ship as security for this debt. (Turkish Commercial Code, Article 1352/1-p).
r. Insurance Premiums:
Insurance premiums and mutual insurance contributions payable by or on behalf of the shipowner are also considered maritime claims (Turkish Commercial Code, Art. 1352/1-r). These premiums are paid to ensure the safe operation of the vessel and its protection against various risks. Shipowners arrange marine insurance policies to protect their vessels against various risks and pay premiums to insurance companies under these policies. For example, insurance can be taken out against ship accidents, storms, or environmental risks that may occur at sea. Furthermore, shipowners may also be required to take out insurance to protect the lives and health of the crew. In addition, mutual insurance clubs are insurance associations formed among shipowners, and specific contributions are paid for the insurances obtained from these clubs. These contributions are considered as contributions to funds established to provide protection against damages the vessel may cause to the environment or other ships. For example, in the event of injury to a ship’s crew member, compensation payable to the crew can be covered by these insurance funds. These types of premiums paid for the safe operation of the vessel are considered as a maritime claim, representing a financial liability imposed on the shipowner.
s. Commission, Brokerage and Agency Fees:
Commissions, brokerage (brokerage services), and agency fees payable by the owner of the vessel or the operator acting on their behalf, in relation to the vessel, are also considered maritime claims (Turkish Commercial Code art. 1352/1-s). These payments are made in exchange for services received to facilitate the vessel’s commercial and operational activities. For example, when a vessel docks at a port or engages in commercial activities in a country, a maritime agent or broker may become involved in that region to expedite the vessel’s operations or to conduct its commercial agreements. These agents organize the vessel’s port services, meet the requirements of the crew and cargo, and carry out the vessel’s commercial transactions. The fees received for these services are an important part of maritime activities. Furthermore, commissions paid for brokerage services in situations such as the purchase-sale or chartering of a vessel are also considered within this scope. For instance, if a vessel owner finds a charterer through a broker when chartering their vessel, the commission fee received by this broker may constitute a maritime claim. Such payments have the status of maritime claims because they ensure the continuity of vessel owners’ commercial transactions, and creditors may demand these payments.
t. Any dispute concerning the ownership or possession of the vessel:
Any dispute arising in relation to the ownership or possession of a vessel (actual use and control of the vessel) falls within the scope of a maritime claim. These disputes may include issues such as who the owner of the vessel is, who actually uses the vessel, or the transfer of possession. Ownership and possession disputes, encompassing legal controversies over the right to use and ownership of the vessel, are considered maritime claims (Turkish Commercial Code art. 1352/1-t).
u. Disputes Between Co-owners of the Vessel:
Any dispute arising between co-owners of a ship regarding its operation or the sharing of its proceeds is considered within the scope of a maritime claim (Turkish Commercial Code, Art. 1352/1-u). Such disputes arise when multiple individuals co-own a ship, and it is possible for co-owners to have disagreements on matters such as how the ship will be operated, for which commercial activities it will be used, or how the income generated will be distributed.
For example, a dispute might arise between parties co-operating a ship regarding its use on a commercial route or how maintenance costs will be covered. Another typical example could be a disagreement among co-owners due to the unfair distribution of rental income generated by the ship. In such a case, one owner of the ship may file a lawsuit against another owner to protect their rights over the ship and may request a provisional attachment on the ship from the court.
Such disputes are frequently observed, especially during the operation of a ship as a profit-generating asset and the process of sharing these profits. The proceeds of the ship should be distributed among the co-owners in proportion to their shares, and decisions regarding ship management should be made by mutual agreement among the co-owners. However, when disagreements arise on these matters, one of the parties may initiate legal proceedings by requesting a provisional attachment on the ship, claiming that the income has not been fairly distributed.
v. Ship Pledge, Ship Mortgage, or Similar Real Obligations:
Ship pledges, ship mortgages, or similar real encumbrances on a ship are considered maritime claims. These types of real encumbrances relate to the ship being offered as collateral for a debt. A ship pledge or mortgage means that the owner or proprietor of the ship provides a creditor with security on the ship in exchange for a debt. In this case, a real right is established on the ship; meaning the ship can be used as collateral to secure the creditor’s claim. (TTK m. 1352/1-v).
A ship pledge or mortgage typically provides a creditor with security against major financial obligations, such as ship financing or repair costs. If the shipowner cannot repay their debt, the creditor can collect their claim by having the ship sold through this real right. Pledging or mortgaging a ship creates a significant financial obligation for shipowners, and this real right may have priority over other claims. Therefore, creditors holding a pledge or mortgage on a ship protect their rights under the scope of maritime claims while possessing the ship as collateral for the debt (TTK m. 1352/1-v).
y. Disputes Regarding Ship Sales:
Any dispute arising from a contract regarding the sale of a ship is considered a maritime claim. Ship sale contracts include the terms and obligations related to the transfer of ownership of the ship. Disputes that may arise between the buyer and seller in such contracts can cover various issues such as the payment of the sale price, delivery period, condition of the ship, delivery of documents, or terms concerning the transfer of ship ownership. (TTK m. 1352/1-y).
Disputes may arise between the parties, especially in cases where the vessel’s sale price is not paid, problems are encountered during the delivery process, or the vessel is not delivered in accordance with the contract. These disputes are maritime claims as they originate from a ship sale contract, and the creditor party may assert a right over the vessel due to the dispute. Disputes concerning ship sales, based on the vessel’s economic value and commercial importance, can lead to significant financial consequences and serious legal proceedings between the parties.
2. The Existence of a Maritime Claim
The amount or right claimed by the creditor as a maritime claim must have validly arisen. This claim must exist within the legal framework and must be one that the creditor can support with evidence.
Even for maritime claims that are not yet due, a precautionary attachment can be requested if the conditions stipulated in the second paragraph of Article 257 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law are met. In this case, even if the debt is not yet due, a precautionary attachment can be applied to the ship under certain conditions. According to Article 257 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law, a request for precautionary attachment for an undue debt is only possible in the following cases: a) If the debtor does not have a fixed place of residence, the creditor may request a precautionary attachment even for an undue debt. b) If the debtor has started to conceal or abscond with their assets or has prepared to flee, or if they are performing fraudulent transactions that violate the creditor’s rights for this purpose, the creditor may also request a precautionary attachment in these situations. In such cases, even if the debt is not yet due, the debt becomes mature and a precautionary attachment can be applied. Such situations allow the creditor to request a precautionary attachment even though the debt is not yet due, in order to secure their claim (Turkish Commercial Code art. 1353/5, Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law art. 257).
3. Submission of Evidence to the Court Regarding the Existence of the Claim
Pursuant to Article 1362 of the Turkish Commercial Code, a creditor requesting a precautionary attachment must submit sufficient evidence to the court to prove the existence and amount of the maritime claim to support their request. In this context, they must prove the nature and monetary value of the claim. According to Article 1362/1 of the Turkish Commercial Code, it is sufficient for the evidence presented by the creditor to the court to show that the claim is based on one of the maritime claims listed in Article 1352 of the Turkish Commercial Code. Article 258 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law also emphasizes that the court deciding on the precautionary attachment is competent and that the creditor must submit evidence that will convince the court regarding the claim and the reasons for attachment.
When requesting a provisional attachment on a vessel, the creditor may submit documents such as invoices, contracts, salvage reports, damage assessment reports, or ship’s logbooks as evidence to prove their claims arising from maritime commerce. These documents must be sufficient to establish adequate conviction for the court regarding the nature and amount of the claim. For instance, it is important to document claims arising from events such as the loss or damage of goods carried on the vessel, or expenses incurred from salvage operations. In this context, expenses incurred for salvage activities, compensation claims, or debts arising from the vessel’s commercial activities must be clearly documented. The court, in light of the evidence presented by the creditor, forms an opinion regarding the reality and amount of the maritime claim and may issue a provisional attachment order accordingly. Consequently, in accordance with the provisions of Article 1362 of the Turkish Commercial Code (TTK) and Article 258 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (İİK), it is a prerequisite for the creditor to present evidence to the court proving the nature and monetary value of their claim in order to obtain a provisional attachment order.
4. The Possibility that the Maritime Claim Cannot Be Collected
Pursuant to Article 1369 of the Turkish Commercial Code (TCC), a request for a precautionary attachment based on maritime claims can be used to secure the creditor’s right against the possibility of the debtor being unable to pay their debt. The risk of non-collection of a maritime claim arises especially when the debtor may attempt to dispose of, abscond with, or conceal the vessel. When the creditor suspects that the debtor will undertake such actions, they may apply to the court and request a precautionary attachment order. In this situation, the creditor may request a precautionary attachment to take precautions before the vessel is sold or absconded with (TCC Art. 1369/1-a). Furthermore, if the debtor takes the vessel abroad or fails to deliver a vessel that is on a voyage, it is important to initiate the precautionary attachment process quickly (TCC Art. 1367).
5. Existence of Ownership and Liability Criteria on the Vessel
Precautionary attachment is an important legal measure that secures the collection of maritime claims. Article 1369 of the TCC regulates the conditions under which a precautionary attachment can be requested. According to this article, for a precautionary attachment to be applied, at least one of the following ownership or liability conditions must be met. (TCC Art. 1369)
Liability of the shipowner: The person who was the owner of the ship at the time the maritime claim arose must still be liable for the debt and be the owner of the ship at the time the attachment is requested (TCC art. 1369/1-a). For a precautionary attachment to be enforced, the person who was the owner of the ship on the date the maritime claim arose must still be liable for the debt on the date the attachment is requested. In this case, if the ship was transferred to another person before the attachment was enforced, or if the debtor no longer bears the owner’s liability, a precautionary attachment cannot be enforced against the new owner. This situation creates a significant problem for creditors, especially in cases where the ship is sold or transferred.
Liability of the lessee: The person who was the lessee at the time the maritime claim arose must still be liable for the debt and be the owner of the ship at the time the attachment is requested (TCC art. 1369/1-b). For instance, the use of yachts through financial leasing methods limits the creditor’s possibility of direct collection from the debtor. Since the financial leasing company owns the ship, it is not possible for the creditor to apply to this company. As the lessee is the party responsible for the lessee’s debts, a direct precautionary attachment may not be applicable to the ship’s ownership.
Obligations in the nature of security: The maritime claim must be secured by a ship mortgage, hypothec, or an in rem obligation (TCC art. 1369/1-c). If the maritime claim is secured by a ship mortgage, hypothec, or a similar in rem obligation, a precautionary attachment may be possible. However, situations such as the inability to correctly identify these in rem rights and the rapid transfer of ownership can prevent the enforcement of the attachment. Creditors may face difficulties in tracking the debtor’s rights over the ship during this process.
Ownership or Possession Dispute: If the dispute concerns the ownership or possession of the vessel, a precautionary attachment can be applied (TCC Art. 1369/1-d). However, in such disputes, a precautionary attachment order can only be issued for the vessel subject to the dispute; an attachment order cannot be obtained for other vessels (TCC Art. 1369/3). When these provisions are considered together, it is concluded that creditors can request a precautionary attachment even in situations of uncertainty regarding ownership or possession rights, but the attachment will only cover the vessel at the center of the dispute. This regulation ensures the protection of the disputed vessel while preventing the unjust attachment of other assets.
Maritime lien: If the claim grants a maritime lien according to TCC Art. 1320, a precautionary attachment can be requested (TCC Art. 1369/1-e).
The second paragraph of Article 1369 of the Turkish Commercial Code regulates how vessels other than those specified in the first paragraph are to be evaluated under precautionary attachment. According to this article, for a precautionary attachment order to be issued for a vessel, the vessel must belong to a person responsible for the maritime claim at the time of the attachment. Furthermore, at the time the claim arose, this person must have been the owner, charterer, demise charterer, or carrier of the vessel. In other words, if the person who holds rights over the vessel when the maritime claim arose was the owner, charterer, or carrier of the vessel when the claim arose, a precautionary attachment can be applied to that vessel. (TCC Art. 1369/2).
This provision states that a request for precautionary arrest must be evaluated according to the vessel’s current status and the ownership and liability relationships at the time the claim arose. Specifically, even if the ownership of the vessel changes, if the liability of the vessel’s owner or charterer continues at the time the claim arose, a precautionary arrest can be applied. However, it should be noted that precautionary arrest is only applicable to persons who are liable for the maritime claim.
The fundamental difference between paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 1369 of the TCC arises from different situations regarding the ownership and debt liability of vessels to which precautionary arrest can be applied. Paragraph 1 regulates that a decision for precautionary arrest can be issued if the person who was the owner or charterer of the vessel at the time the maritime claim arose is still the owner of the vessel and liable for the debt at the time the arrest is requested. This emphasizes the continuity of the debt and ownership. Paragraph 2, on the other hand, is broader and states that precautionary arrest can be applied against a person who owns the vessel liable for a maritime claim and who was the owner, charterer, demise charterer, or carrier of the vessel when the claim arose. Here, for the arrest to be applied, it is sufficient that the vessel is owned by the person connected to the claim; whether this person was the owner at the time the debt arose is not important. The core idea is that while paragraph 1 requires a stricter ownership-connection condition, paragraph 2 evaluates liability based on the vessel’s status at the time of the arrest.
In other words, the fundamental difference between paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 1369 of the TCC lies in the connection between the vessel subject to attachment and the inception of the claim. Paragraph 1 stipulates that a provisional attachment may be enforced if the person who was the owner or charterer of the vessel at the time the maritime claim arose is still the owner of the vessel and liable for the debt at the time the attachment is requested. In this paragraph, a direct connection is sought between the vessel from which the claim arose and the liability for the claim; meaning the vessel subject to attachment must be the vessel from which the maritime claim arose. Paragraph 2, however, states that a provisional attachment may be enforced if, regardless of whether the vessel subject to attachment had a connection with this person when the maritime claim arose, the vessel belongs to the person liable for the maritime claim at the time the attachment is enforced. In this case, the person connected to the claim may be the owner or charterer of the vessel, but other vessels belonging to this person may also be subject to attachment. That is, there is no requirement for the vessel to be the exact vessel from which the claim arose; it is sufficient for it to belong to the debtor at the time of attachment. In summary, while Paragraph 1 stipulates that the vessel must be directly connected to the claim, Paragraph 2 covers situations where it is sufficient for the vessel to merely belong to the assets of the person connected to the claim.
6. Fulfillment of the Obligation to Provide Security
A creditor wishing to apply for a precautionary attachment, is obliged to provide security in the amount of 10,000 Special Drawing Rights (SDR – Special Drawing Rights, an international accounting unit created by the International Monetary Fund [IMF] and used for foreign exchange reserves). This security is required to safeguard the precautionary attachment application, and it can be deposited in cash, or bank guarantee letters or other suitable types of securities can also be accepted (Turkish Commercial Code, Art. 1363/1).
The opposing party (debtor) may request an increase in the security amount from the same court at any stage. When evaluating this request, the daily operating expenses incurred while the vessel is detained due to the precautionary attachment and the profits lost due to the precautionary attachment are taken into consideration. If the court decides for additional security to be deposited, this security must be deposited within the specified period. If the additional security is not deposited within the period, the precautionary attachment decision automatically ceases to be effective, i.e., it is canceled (Turkish Commercial Code, Art. 1363/2). However, ship creditors listed in sub-paragraph (a) of the first paragraph of Article 1320 are exempt from the obligation to provide security. These creditors are exempt from this requirement by virtue of maritime law (Turkish Commercial Code, Art. 1363/3).
The creditor may also request a reduction in the security amount from the same court. The court may decide to reduce the security amount upon request. Thus, during the precautionary attachment process, the amount of security can both be increased and, if requested by the creditor, decreased (Turkish Commercial Code, Art. 1363/4).
7. Application to the Competent Court
a. Competent Courts for Precautionary Attachment Before Filing a Lawsuit
The courts competent to issue a precautionary attachment order before a lawsuit is filed vary according to the vessel’s flag and its location. The competent courts for Turkish-flagged and foreign-flagged vessels, and the effects of jurisdiction or arbitration agreements, are as follows:
aa. Competent Courts for Turkish-Flagged Vessels:
For Turkish-flagged vessels, a precautionary attachment order before a lawsuit is filed can be issued by the court of the place where the vessel is located. This location is where the vessel has dropped anchor, is moored to a buoy or tonneau, docked at a port, or has been dry-docked. Furthermore, if the vessel is registered in the Turkish Ship Registry, the court of the place where the registration is located is competent. If the vessel is not registered, the court of the shipowner’s domicile can issue a precautionary attachment order. For vessels registered in a special registry, the court of the charterer’s domicile is competent (Turkish Commercial Code, article 1354/1).
bb. Competent Courts for Foreign-Flagged Vessels:
For foreign-flagged vessels in Turkey, a precautionary attachment order before a lawsuit is filed can only be issued by the court of the place where the vessel is located. The vessel’s location may be where it has dropped anchor, is moored to a buoy or tonneau, docked, or has been dry-docked. No other court can issue a precautionary attachment order for foreign-flagged vessels; this jurisdiction solely belongs to the court of the place where the vessel is physically located (Turkish Commercial Code, article 1355/1).
cc. If there is a Jurisdiction or Arbitration Agreement:
Even if a jurisdiction or arbitration agreement has been made between the parties regarding a maritime claim, the Turkish courts’ authority to issue a preliminary attachment (arrest) decision does not cease. Even if a foreign court or arbitral tribunal is authorized according to a jurisdiction or arbitration agreement concerning a maritime claim, Turkish courts can issue a preliminary attachment (arrest) decision. Furthermore, even if the law of a foreign state is applicable to the merits of the maritime claim, Turkish courts, which are authorized according to Articles 1354 and 1355 of the Turkish Commercial Code, can issue a preliminary attachment (arrest) decision to secure the maritime claim (TCC Art. 1356/1).
b. Competent Courts for Preliminary Attachment (Arrest) After a Lawsuit Has Been Filed
Requesting a preliminary attachment (arrest) decision after a lawsuit has been filed varies according to specific stages of the litigation process:
aa. If Preliminary Attachment (Arrest) is Requested After a Lawsuit Has Been Filed in a Turkish Court
After a lawsuit concerning a maritime claim has been filed in a Turkish court, a preliminary attachment (arrest) decision can only be requested from the court hearing the case. A preliminary attachment (arrest) decision cannot be requested from another court. This regulation signifies that the competent court after a lawsuit has been filed should manage all stages of the case. Therefore, if a preliminary attachment (arrest) decision is to be requested to secure a maritime claim after a lawsuit has been filed, this request can only be made to the court hearing the case (TCC Art. 1357/1).
bb. If Preliminary Attachment (Arrest) is Requested After a Lawsuit Has Been Filed in a Court or Before an Arbitrator Abroad
If a lawsuit concerning a maritime claim has been filed in a court abroad, or if the lawsuit is ongoing before an arbitration panel, then a precautionary attachment order can only be requested from the competent courts specified in Articles 1354 and 1355 of the Turkish Commercial Code until a final judgment is rendered. These courts are the courts of the place where the ship is anchored, moored to a buoy or bollard, docked, or dry-docked. While the lawsuit or arbitration process abroad is ongoing, the creditor wishing to obtain a precautionary attachment order must apply to these competent courts in Turkey (TCC Art. 1357/2).
c. Competent Court for Objections
Persons against whom a precautionary attachment order has been issued can object to this order. Which court will examine the objections is determined based on the stage of the lawsuit and where it was filed. Furthermore, requests such as the modification of the precautionary attachment order or the increase of securities are also decided by specific courts.
aa. Before a Lawsuit on the Merits is Filed:
If the precautionary attachment order was issued before a lawsuit on the merits was filed, the authority to decide on objections belongs to the court that issued the precautionary attachment order. That is, if a precautionary attachment order was obtained by the creditor before filing a lawsuit, the debtor objecting to the order applies to the court that issued it (TCC Art. 1358/1-a).
bb. If a Lawsuit on the Merits has been Filed in Turkey:
If an objection to the precautionary attachment order is made after a lawsuit on the merits has been filed in Turkey, then the competent court to decide on the objections is the court hearing the case. That is, the court hearing the lawsuit on the merits also has the authority to examine objections made to the precautionary attachment order (TCC Art. 1358/1-b).
cc. If a Lawsuit has been Filed Abroad or Before an Arbitrator Regarding the Merits:
If an objection to a precautionary attachment order is made after a lawsuit on the merits has been filed in a foreign court or before an arbitrator, the authority to decide on the objections belongs to the court that issued the precautionary attachment order. In other words, if the precautionary attachment order was obtained in Turkey, but the main lawsuit is being heard abroad or before an arbitrator, objections to the precautionary attachment order must still be made to the Turkish court that issued the order (Turkish Commercial Code art. 1358/1-c).
d. Competent Court for Modification of Precautionary Attachment Order and Security Claims
Apart from objections to a precautionary attachment order, requests such as modification of the order, claims of ownership, increasing or decreasing the securities deposited by the parties, changing the type of security, or its cancellation are also decided by the same courts. In this case, the court that issued the precautionary attachment order is also competent to rule on such applications. If one of the parties believes that the security needs to be increased or decreased, these requests must also be submitted to the court that issued the order (Turkish Commercial Code art. 1358/2).
e. Competent Court in the Main Proceedings
The courts that issue precautionary attachment orders related to maritime claims may also be competent in the lawsuit concerning the merits of the claim. In accordance with Articles 1354 and 1355 of the Turkish Commercial Code, the court authorized to issue a precautionary attachment order regarding maritime claims will also be competent in the lawsuit to be filed by the creditor to complete the precautionary attachment, provided there is no jurisdiction or arbitration agreement regarding the merits of the maritime claim. In this case, the court that issued the precautionary attachment also has the authority to conduct the proceedings regarding the merits of the maritime claim.
In addition, the enforcement office that imposed the provisional attachment is authorized to carry out the enforcement proceedings that will follow the attachment. In other words, when enforcement proceedings are initiated as a result of the provisional attachment, the execution of these proceedings also falls within the jurisdiction of the enforcement office that imposed the provisional attachment (TCC Art. 1359).
f. Authorized Court in an Action for Recognition and Enforcement
If a Turkish court has issued a provisional attachment order concerning a maritime claim, the recognition and enforcement in Turkey of a foreign court judgment or arbitral award given on the merits of that claim is also subject to certain conditions. A Turkish court may be authorized to recognize and enforce a foreign court judgment or arbitral award obtained for a maritime claim. For this, there are two important conditions:
aa. The vessel must be within the jurisdiction of the court on the date the request for enforcement is made: If, when the application for enforcement is made, the vessel is anchored, moored to a buoy, berthed, or dry-docked within the jurisdiction of the Turkish court that issued the provisional attachment order, then the Turkish court is authorized to recognize and enforce this foreign court judgment or arbitral award (TCC Art. 1360/1-a).
bb. The security must be held in the court’s treasury: If the vessel is under the court’s jurisdiction due to security deposited for its release, i.e., if the security deposited in accordance with Articles 1370 to 1372 is in the court’s treasury at the time the application for enforcement is made, then the Turkish court also has the authority to recognize and enforce the foreign court judgment or arbitral award (TCC Art. 1360/1-b).
g. Authorized Court in a Compensation Case to be Filed Due to Unlawful Provisional Attachment
The court that issued the precautionary attachment order is authorized to hear the compensation lawsuit to be filed against the creditor due to an unlawful precautionary attachment. If the precautionary attachment request is found to be unlawful and it is claimed that the debtor suffered damages due to this decision, the injured debtor may file a compensation lawsuit against the creditor. This compensation lawsuit is heard by the court that issued the precautionary attachment order (TTK m. 1361/1).
However, if a lawsuit concerning the merits of a maritime claim has been filed in a domestic or foreign court or before an arbitrator, the outcome of this lawsuit is considered a prejudicial question for the compensation lawsuit. In other words, the compensation lawsuit cannot proceed before the main lawsuit concerning the maritime claim is concluded. In this case, the compensation lawsuit filed due to unlawful precautionary attachment is stayed until the lawsuit heard on the merits becomes final (TTK m. 1361/2).
B. Implementation of the Precautionary Attachment Order
For the precautionary attachment order to be enforced, the creditor must, starting from the date the order was issued, apply to the enforcement office within the jurisdiction of the court that issued the order or where the vessel is located within three business days. If an application is not made within this period, the precautionary attachment order automatically becomes void (TTK m. 1364/1).
1. Time Limit for Initiating Precautionary Attachment:
Upon the creditor’s request, the enforcement office immediately implements the precautionary attachment. This procedure can also be carried out at night and on public holidays, according to the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law, meaning these periods do not hinder attachment procedures (TTK m. 1365/1-2).
2. Prohibition of the Vessel from Sailing and Taking into Custody:
After an interim attachment decision is issued, the enforcement office prohibits the ship from sailing and takes it into custody. During this process, the attachment procedure is notified to the ship’s captain, owner, non-owner charterer, or their authorized representatives. These individuals, upon taking possession of the ship, assume the responsibility of protecting it as a “bailee.” The person who takes over the duty as bailee is reminded of these responsibilities, as well as the criminal liabilities arising under Article 289 of the Turkish Penal Code. The criminal liabilities specified in this article include the sanctions that the bailee may face if they violate their duties. (TCC Art. 1366/1).
On the other hand, in interim attachment proceedings, there is no need for a separate court order to prohibit the ship from sailing. According to TCC 1366, the act of prohibiting the ship from sailing and taking it into custody is a natural consequence of interim attachment, and this procedure is carried out directly by the enforcement officer. The court does not need to issue an additional decision on this matter, as the prohibition from sailing is considered part of the legal process of interim attachment (Supreme Court 12th Civil Chamber, Dated 11.01.2023, 2022/7101E., 2023/76K.).
3. Preparation of the Interim Attachment Report and Determination of the Ship’s Value
In the record prepared during the provisional attachment process, it is sufficient to state only the name of the ship; writing down the ship’s value is not mandatory. However, if one of the parties requests the determination of the ship’s value, this request is forwarded to the enforcement court, and the court determines the ship’s value. During the valuation process, relevant parties are summoned to the individuals identified by the enforcement court in accordance with the information in the file. Thus, the ship’s value is officially determined by the court (Turkish Commercial Code, article 1366/2). This practice ensures a fair and transparent valuation process for both the creditor and the debtor in cases where the ship’s value needs to be determined during the attachment process.
4. Notification of Ship Attachment to Interested Parties and Registration in Records
Immediately after the provisional attachment order is executed on a ship, the enforcement officer must notify the relevant authorities of this decision. First, they promptly relay the information that the ship has been barred from sailing to the coast guard command or law enforcement agency, the port authority, and the customs administration (Turkish Commercial Code, article 1366/3). This prevents any escape or illegal activity involving the ship. Furthermore, on the first business day following the execution of the provisional attachment order, the situation is also reported to the registry office where the ship is registered. If the attached ship is foreign-flagged, this notification is also made to the nearest consulate of the state whose flag the ship flies. This is important for the protection of international procedures and diplomatic relations (Turkish Commercial Code, article 1366/4).
5. Procedures to be Followed if the Ship is at Sea
If the vessel is on voyage at the time the precautionary attachment order is to be executed, a different procedure applies. For Turkish-flagged vessels, the precautionary attachment order is served to the owner, the non-owner bareboat charterer (or owner pro hac vice), and individuals personally liable for the debt, notifying them that security must be provided within 10 days for the maritime claim. Otherwise, it is warned that the vessel must be delivered to the enforcement office on its next voyage. If the vessel is not delivered, criminal proceedings will be initiated against the responsible persons according to Article 289 of the Turkish Penal Code. For foreign-flagged vessels, the precautionary attachment order can be executed with the assistance of the coast guard command until the vessel leaves Turkish territorial waters (Turkish Commercial Code Art. 1367/1).
6. Scope of Precautionary Attachment
The precautionary attachment of a vessel covers not only the vessel itself but also the income and benefits derived by the debtor from its operation. This indicates that all profits arising from the vessel’s operation are also subject to attachment (Turkish Commercial Code Art. 1368/1).
7. Vessel Management and Maintenance:
The enforcement office is obliged to take all necessary measures for the administration, operation, maintenance, and protection of the attached vessel. This is an important aspect for ensuring the vessel’s safety and preservation (Turkish Commercial Code Art. 1368/2).
C. Providing Security Against Precautionary Attachment Order and Procedures for Lifting the Attachment
1. Deposit of the Vessel’s Value
A ship that has been provisionally arrested may always be released to the debtor upon its value being deposited with the enforcement office to ensure its delivery, or by providing an immovable pledge, a ship mortgage, or a reputable bank guarantee acceptable to the enforcement officer. If the ship has been provisionally arrested while in the possession of a third party, that party may take custody of the ship as a bailee by providing a promissory note (Turkish Commercial Code, Article 1370/1). If the provisional arrest on the ship continues, the release of the ship shall be notified to relevant authorities such as the coast guard command, port authority, and customs administration, and the record of the provisional arrest in the registry shall be preserved (Turkish Commercial Code, Article 1370/2). Even if a lawsuit for the continuation of the provisional arrest results in a decision to pay the security to the creditor, other maritime creditors have the right to attach this security until it is withdrawn from the enforcement office’s treasury (Turkish Commercial Code, Article 1370/3). A ship arrested due to maritime claims listed in subparagraphs (t) and (u) of Article 1352 may be released to the person in possession if that person provides sufficient security (Turkish Commercial Code, Article 1370/4). The provisions of international agreements are reserved (Turkish Commercial Code, Article 1370/5).
2. Lifting of Provisional Arrest by Providing Security
The owner or debtor of the vessel may request the court to lift the precautionary attachment by providing sufficient security for the entire maritime claim, interest, and expenses, provided that it does not exceed the value of the vessel. After enforcement proceedings have commenced, this authority passes to the enforcement court (TCC art. 1371/1). It is necessary to notify institutions such as the coast guard command, port authority, and customs administration that the precautionary attachment has been lifted and to delete the record of the precautionary attachment from the vessel’s register (TCC art. 1371/2). Even if, as a result of a lawsuit filed for the continuation of the precautionary attachment, it is decided that the security be paid to the creditor, other maritime creditors cannot place an attachment on this security (TCC art. 1371/3).
3. Agreement of the Parties
The type and amount of security to be provided pursuant to Articles 1370 and 1371 may be freely agreed upon between the creditor and the owner or non-owner operator of the vessel (TCC art. 1372/1).
4. Reserved Rights:
Providing security for the release of the vessel does not imply acceptance of liability, waiver of any objection or defense, or waiver of the right to limit liability (TCC art. 1373/1).
5. Modification of Security:
The person providing security pursuant to Articles 1370 to 1372 may always apply to the court for the reduction of the amount of security, the modification of its type, or its cancellation (TCC art. 1374/1).
D. Conditions for Reapplication of Precautionary Attachment
If a vessel has been preventively arrested domestically or abroad and subsequently released upon provision of security, a re-arrest or preventive arrest for the same claim on the same vessel may be applied under certain conditions. This process comes into play if the existing security is insufficient or if other specific conditions arise.
If a vessel has been released due to a maritime claim or security has been provided in relation to the vessel, the re-arrest of the same vessel or a preventive arrest for the same claim is only possible under the following circumstances:
1. Insufficient Security:
If the type or amount of the initial security is insufficient, provided that the total amount of security to be obtained does not exceed the value of the vessel, the creditor may request a re-arrest (Turkish Commercial Code, Article 1375/1-a).
2. Debtor’s Failure to Fulfill Obligation:
If the person who provided the initial security fails to fulfill their obligations partially or fully, or is not capable of fulfilling their obligation, a re-arrest may be applied in this case (Turkish Commercial Code, Article 1375/1-b).
Release Condition: If the vessel has been released at the request or with the consent of the creditor acting on reasonable grounds, or because the creditor could not take reasonable measures to prevent the release, the creditor may request a re-arrest (Turkish Commercial Code, Article 1375/1-c).
E. Preventive Arrest on Another Vessel for the Same Claim
A different vessel may also be subject to preventive arrest for the same maritime claim. However, this is only possible under the following circumstances:
1. Insufficient Security:
If the type or amount of security previously provided is insufficient, a precautionary attachment may be enforced on another ship (TCC Art. 1375/2-a).
2. Debtor’s Failure to Perform Their Obligation or Unlawful Release:
If the debtor’s failure to perform their obligations as stated in the first paragraph, or the ship’s release beyond the creditor’s control, applies, a precautionary attachment may be requested on another ship (TCC Art. 1375/2-b).
F. Compensation Lawsuit Due to Unlawful Precautionary Attachment:
If, after a creditor requests a precautionary attachment, the opposing party (the debtor) claims that this attachment is unlawful and that they have suffered material damage, they may file a compensation lawsuit against the creditor. This compensation lawsuit is heard by the court that issued the precautionary attachment decision (TCC Art. 1361/1). For example, if a shipowner has suffered damage due to a precautionary attachment applied to a ship, they may file a lawsuit against the creditor for the compensation of these damages. In this lawsuit, the redress of damages arising from the precautionary attachment is sought, and the court may decide, depending on the circumstances, to increase the security or to cover the damages.
If a lawsuit concerning the merits of a maritime claim is ongoing, the compensation lawsuit will not proceed before that lawsuit concludes. In other words, the compensation lawsuit is considered a preliminary issue until the outcome of the main lawsuit regarding the maritime claim (TCC Art. 1361/2). For example, if there is a lawsuit between the creditor and the debtor concerning a maritime claim in a court abroad, the compensation lawsuit will be put on hold until that lawsuit concludes. This determines whether the claim for unlawful precautionary attachment will lead to compensation, depending on the outcome of the main lawsuit.
In this process, a decision is made by evaluating the material losses of the damaged party and other damages incurred due to the precautionary attachment.
G. Obligation to File a Lawsuit After Provisional Attachment
In provisional attachments applied to ships, the periods stipulated in Article 264 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law for the creditor to finalize the attachment decision have been extended to one month. The creditor must file a lawsuit or initiate enforcement proceedings within one month after the provisional attachment is executed or the attachment record is served to them; otherwise, the provisional attachment becomes invalid. If the debtor objects to the payment order, the creditor must apply to the enforcement court or file a lawsuit within seven days to have this objection lifted. If these procedures are not carried out in a timely manner during the provisional attachment process for ships, the attachment decision becomes null and void. (TCC Art. 1376).
Conclusion
The provisions for provisional attachment within the maritime commercial law of the Turkish Commercial Code play a critical role in protecting the rights of maritime creditors. This process, which gives rise to significant financial obligations for shipowners, operators, and charterers, provides creditors with a powerful legal mechanism for the collection of debts, while also offering various guarantees for the protection of debtors’ property rights. However, because this process has a complex and technical structure, there are many considerations to be mindful of during legal proceedings. A provisional attachment decision can only be issued under specific conditions and in light of certain evidence, and it is important that the rights of both parties are protected in a balanced manner during this process. It will ensure that parties seek support from specialized lawyers for these legal transactions related to maritime trade, fully protecting their legal rights and minimizing potential disputes.
Keywords : provisional attachment of a ship, ship, attachment, maritime trade, lawyer, maritime claim, Tuzla, Istanbul, ship claim, ship operator, ship owner, operation of a ship, ship loss and damage, cargo damage
IMPORTANT REMINDER
The provisional attachment of a ship involves a complex and detailed process in maritime trade law. It is extremely important for all relevant parties to act in accordance with the legal requirements of the process. Therefore, to secure your rights over the ship and ensure the smooth progress of the legal process, in the field, it is recommended to work with an expert lawyer or legal consultant.Provisional attachment decisions and their implementations can lead to material and legal consequences; therefore, managing the process with expert support will minimize potential problems in the future.
