Turkish 
English 
Russian 
German 
Maintenance (nafaka) in Turkish family law is a statutory financial support obligation intended to secure the living of a spouse, children or close relatives who become financially weak because the marriage has broken down or ended. The Turkish Civil Code regulates maintenance under four headings: interim maintenance (Articles 169 and 197 TMK), poverty maintenance for a former spouse (Article 175 TMK), child maintenance (Article 182 TMK) and support maintenance for relatives (Article 364 TMK).
This guide explains, in light of current Turkish Court of Cassation (Yargıtay) decisions, the legal nature of maintenance claims in Antalya, the conditions of and differences between the four types, the balance of fault, the financial assessment, the competent court, the one-year limitation period, adjustment of maintenance and enforcement.
What Is Maintenance? Legal Nature and the Principle of Solidarity
Maintenance is neither compensation nor a penalty; it is statutory financial support for a family member who is or will become needy. It is rooted in the constitutional protection of the family and the duty of mutual support regulated in the Turkish Civil Code. Maintenance is therefore the most concrete expression of social solidarity in family law.
Maintenance is a continuing financial obligation imposed by law between spouses, children or close relatives, whereby one person provides for another's living, with the amount fixed by court decision. The obligor need not be at fault; what matters is the claimant's need and the obligor's financial capacity.
The Four Types of Maintenance
The Turkish Civil Code provides for four separate types of maintenance for different family situations. Each has its own conditions, duration and legal basis.
| Type of maintenance | Legal basis | Duration | Who may claim? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interim maintenance (tedbir nafakası) | Arts. 169, 197 TMK | During the divorce case or a period of separate living | Spouse and children in their custody |
| Poverty maintenance (yoksulluk nafakası) | Art. 175 TMK | Indefinite (subject to statutory termination) | Spouse who will fall into poverty because of the divorce |
| Child maintenance (iştirak nafakası) | Art. 182 TMK | Until the child comes of age (or completes education) | Parent with custody (on behalf of the child) |
| Support maintenance (yardım nafakası) | Art. 364 TMK | Until the need ends | Ascendants, descendants and siblings (from siblings who are well off) |
Interim Maintenance: Temporary Support During the Divorce Case
Interim maintenance is temporary maintenance covering the housing, food, education and health expenses of the spouse and children from the filing of the divorce action until the judgment becomes final. Under Article 169 of the Turkish Civil Code, the judge takes the necessary provisional measures for the duration of the case of their own motion, even if neither party requests them.
The Judge's Duty to Act of Their Own Motion
When a divorce action is filed, the spouses' duty to live together and support each other is transformed legally. In making provisional arrangements for housing, living costs and especially the custody of children, the judge performs a duty of public order. In divorce cases before the family courts in Antalya this principle is applied strictly; the judge acts in the child's interest even without a request for interim maintenance.
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Docket 2014/11020, Decision 2014/14895Interim maintenance is a temporary measure valid during the divorce case. Poverty maintenance is maintenance that a spouse who will fall into poverty as a result of the divorce, and whose fault is not heavier, may claim from the other spouse indefinitely. Under Article 175 of the Turkish Civil Code, the party who will fall into poverty may claim indefinite maintenance in proportion to the other party's financial capacity, provided their own fault is not heavier.
Article 197 TMK: Interim Maintenance for a Spouse Justified in Living Apart
Interim maintenance arises not only when a divorce action has been filed but also where the marriage continues and the spouses must live apart for a justified reason. Article 197 of the Turkish Civil Code guarantees the right of a spouse who lives apart for a justified reason to claim financial contribution from the other. Violence, insults, serious incompatibility or conduct making the family home unsafe are the justified reasons most often relied upon.
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Docket 2011/4922, Decision 2011/11636A judgment of the Antalya 4th Criminal Court of Peace found, on the basis of a medical report, that the defendant had intentionally injured the claimant wife and imposed a judicial fine. In these circumstances the claimant wife is justified in living apart. The interim maintenance determined in view of the children's ages and needs should be increased equitably without straining the defendant husband's financial capacity.
Even where the divorce action is dismissed, interim maintenance may need to continue if the parties in fact continue to live apart, so that the children do not suffer. This shows that interim maintenance is not limited to the divorce case and that legal protection exists at every stage in which the family unit is shaken.
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Docket 2014/1940, Decision 2014/9941Maintenance claimed for a child after a dismissed divorce case is, by its nature, interim maintenance under Article 197 TMK. Even without a divorce judgment, the parties' separate living and the child's need for care require such maintenance to be awarded.
Limits on Interim Maintenance for a Spouse With an Income
Interim maintenance is not a means of transferring resources to a party with no need. If the claiming spouse has a regular and sufficient income, the court may reject the claim. This reinforces that the purpose of maintenance is not to “equalise finances” but to “prevent need”.
Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, Docket 2016/728, Decision 2017/5722The file shows that the claimant wife works as a kindergarten teacher, has a regular and continuous income and does not need interim maintenance. In these circumstances the conditions of Articles 169 and 175 of the Turkish Civil Code were not met.
Poverty Maintenance: Indefinite Support After Divorce (Article 175 TMK)
Poverty maintenance is the maintenance that a spouse who will fall into poverty once the divorce becomes final, and whose fault is not heavier, may claim indefinitely from the other spouse in proportion to the latter's financial capacity. It rests on three pillars: the risk of poverty because of the divorce, not bearing the heavier fault, and the other party's financial capacity.
The Legal Concept of Falling Into Poverty
In Turkish law, poverty is not limited to living at the subsistence threshold. According to settled Court of Cassation case law, poverty means being unable to meet basic needs such as food, clothing, housing, health, transport and culture from one's own resources. Being deprived of the standard of living one would have had without the divorce, where this falls below minimum subsistence, is regarded as falling into poverty.
Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, Docket 2024/5472, Decision 2025/2606Under Article 175 of Turkish Civil Code No. 4721, poverty maintenance can be awarded to a divorced spouse only if the spouse claiming it will fall into poverty because of the divorce. If this condition is not met, the claim must be rejected.
A spouse with a regular and continuous income may be found not to fall into poverty, and the claim may be rejected. Courts examine carefully the position of spouses with continuous sources such as a pension, civil-service salary or business income.
Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, Docket 2024/4312, Decision 2025/1380The claimant wife is retired, has a regular income and will not fall into poverty because of the divorce. It must be accepted that the conditions of Article 175 TMK are not met in her favour. Awarding maintenance instead of rejecting her poverty maintenance claim is contrary to procedure and law.
Balance of Fault: The Spouse at Heavier Fault Cannot Receive Maintenance
The decisive element of poverty maintenance is fault. Under Article 175 TMK, the claiming spouse's fault must not be heavier than the other spouse's. Maintenance may be claimed where fault is equal or lesser; the claim of a spouse bearing heavier or full fault is rejected even if they will fall into poverty. By contrast, the obligor need not be at fault; they must pay as long as they have the financial capacity.
Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, Docket 2012/26005, Decision 2013/23516For poverty maintenance to be awarded on divorce, the claimant must not bear the heavier fault for the divorce. Since it is established that the defendant-counterclaimant wife bears the heavier fault, poverty maintenance cannot be awarded in her favour.
Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, Docket 2014/21408, Decision 2015/6293Since the court found the defendant predominantly at fault for the events leading to the divorce, awarding poverty maintenance in the defendant's favour is contrary to procedure and law.
Financial Assessment and the Principle of Equity (Article 4 TMK)
Determining the amount of poverty maintenance falls within the judge's wide discretion. This discretion is not unlimited; it must be grounded in law, equity and the parties' actual financial situation. The court considers salaries, real estate, additional income, living standards and the economic conditions of the day as a whole.
Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, Docket 2023/8208, Decision 2023/5666Having regard to the parties' actual social and economic circumstances, the nature of maintenance and the economic conditions of the day, the poverty maintenance awarded to the wife was found too low. The court should award a more appropriate amount, also taking into account Article 4 of Law No. 4721 on equity.
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Docket 2015/17850, Decision 2016/2791Having regard to the parties' social and economic circumstances and the nature of maintenance, the poverty maintenance awarded was found too high and inconsistent with the principle of equity in Article 4 TMK. The amount must be reassessed considering that the claimant pays rent from a limited pension, while the defendant, besides a higher pension, lives in a home owned by his son and has a summer house.
Termination and Removal of Poverty Maintenance (Article 176 TMK)
Although poverty maintenance is in principle indefinite, it does not mean “absolute payment for life”. Article 176 of the Turkish Civil Code clearly sets out when maintenance ends automatically and when it may be removed by court decision.
Automatic Termination
Maintenance ends by law, without any court decision, if the maintenance creditor remarries or if either party (creditor or debtor) dies. As maintenance is a personal right, it does not pass to heirs on death; only accrued and due maintenance debts can be claimed from the estate.
Removal by Court Decision
A separate action is required to prove these cases: the creditor living with another person as if married without marrying, a fundamental improvement in the creditor's finances that ends their poverty (such as a well-paid job or inheriting wealth), or the creditor leading a dishonourable lifestyle. These must be proven with concrete evidence; abstract allegations are not sufficient to remove maintenance.
Child Maintenance: The Child's Best Interests and Custody (Article 182 TMK)
Child maintenance is the contribution, in proportion to their means, that the spouse who is not given custody after a divorce or separation makes to the child's care, education and health expenses. Embodying the principle of the child's best interests, it is a matter of public order that the judge must consider of their own motion even if not requested.
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Docket 2017/16123, Decision 2017/15627Under Article 182/2 TMK, the spouse who is not given custody must contribute to the child's care and education expenses according to their means. In fixing child maintenance, the effort expended and the ordinary expenses borne by the custodial parent in fulfilling this role must also be taken into account.
The Child's Needs in Fixing Maintenance
The amount of child maintenance is based on the child's age, level of education, health and the standard of living to which the child was accustomed while the family was together. Extraordinary expenses, such as private schooling, a health condition requiring continuous treatment or regular sports or artistic activities, are reflected in the amount to the extent the obligor's means allow.
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Docket 2012/21562, Decision 2012/24399Child maintenance must be determined in line with the child's age, education, the purchasing power of money under current economic conditions and general needs, also taking into account the financial situation of the mother and father.
The Adult Child and the Transition to Support (Education) Maintenance
Child maintenance ends by law when the child turns 18 and comes of age. However, if the child's education continues, the child may personally file an action for support maintenance under Articles 328/2 and 364 TMK. This maintenance aims to cover the child's basic needs during university, postgraduate or vocational education.
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Docket 2013/10123, Decision 2013/11647The claimant was an adult on the date the action was filed. Child maintenance ended by law and there is no child maintenance that can be increased. The judge must characterise the action correctly and consider that an adult child in need may claim support maintenance from the father under Article 364/1 TMK.
Support Maintenance: Financial Solidarity Within the Family (Article 364 TMK)
Unlike child and poverty maintenance, support maintenance covers a wider circle of relatives and reflects the social state principle in family law. Under Article 364 TMK, everyone must provide maintenance to ascendants (parents, grandparents) and descendants (children, grandchildren) who would otherwise fall into poverty, and siblings who are well off must likewise support their siblings.
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Docket 2015/13271, Decision 2015/20763Everyone must provide maintenance to ascendants, descendants and siblings who would otherwise fall into poverty. Those without income sufficient to cover expenses necessary for a person's material existence, such as food, clothing, housing, health, transport and education, are regarded as poor. The amount must strike a reasonable balance between the obligor's means and the claimant's needs.
Fault is not a condition for support maintenance. The fact that the claimant became needy through their own fault does not entirely remove the other party's duty to support; the judge may, however, take it into account on grounds of equity when fixing the amount. Conversely, awarding maintenance in an amount that would drive the obligor into hardship is contrary to equity.
How Is a Maintenance Action Filed? Procedure, Jurisdiction and Limitation
Asserting maintenance rights in accordance with procedural rules is as vital as acquiring them under substantive law. A procedural error may lead to the dismissal of a justified claim.
Competent Court and Venue
Under Law No. 4787 on the Establishment, Duties and Procedures of Family Courts, family courts have jurisdiction over maintenance claims. Where there is no family court, these cases are heard by civil courts of first instance acting as family courts. Since there are family courts at the Antalya Courthouse, maintenance actions filed in Antalya are heard directly by them.
As to venue, Article 177 TMK provides that the court of the maintenance creditor's place of residence has jurisdiction over maintenance actions filed after divorce. This special venue rule favours the creditor and aims to reduce the litigation costs and travel burden of the financially weaker party.
One-Year Limitation Period After Divorce (Article 178 TMK)
Poverty maintenance not claimed during the divorce case may be claimed in a separate action within one year of the divorce judgment becoming final. Under Article 178 TMK, claims arising from the end of the marriage by divorce become time-barred one year after the judgment becomes final.
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Docket 2013/3807, Decision 2013/4556Poverty maintenance is an ancillary right dependent on divorce that takes effect once the divorce judgment is final. There is no provision of law stating that poverty maintenance cannot be claimed after divorce. Under Article 175 TMK, the party who will fall into poverty may claim indefinite maintenance in proportion to the other's financial capacity, provided their own fault is not heavier.
Not claiming maintenance in the divorce case does not amount to a waiver. Unless there is an express written waiver, an independent maintenance action may be filed within one year of the judgment becoming final. If this period is missed and the other party raises the limitation defence, the action will be dismissed.
Adjusting Maintenance: Increase, Reduction and Removal (Article 331 TMK)
Once fixed, the amount of maintenance does not remain unchanged forever. Changes in economic conditions, loss of purchasing power, expenses that rise as the child grows or extraordinary changes in the parties' incomes make adjustment necessary. Under Article 331 TMK, if circumstances change, the judge redetermines or removes maintenance upon request.
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Docket 2015/17412, Decision 2016/2632Ruling without examining the economic value and income of the defendant's income-producing real estate, such as shared plots and an olive grove and orchard inherited from his late father, amounts to incomplete examination. Having regard to the principle of equity in Article 4 TMK, an appropriate amount must be fixed after investigating all of the defendant's income in detail, so as to preserve the child's standard of living.
In adjustment actions, the burden of proof lies with the party claiming that circumstances have changed. Although the court establishes the parties' social and economic situation through a police inquiry, this is often superficial. Evidence revealing the other party's true financial capacity, such as bank account movements, land registry records, vehicle registrations and business income, must be brought into the court file in full.
Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, Docket 2013/18681, Decision 2014/4616Where there is no legal reason not to increase child maintenance, dismissing the action instead of ordering an increase in an amount consistent with the principle of equity in Article 4 TMK is unlawful.
Enforcing Maintenance Claims
Maintenance awarded by the court is collected through enforcement proceedings if the obligor does not pay voluntarily. Maintenance claims are privileged claims under the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (İİK); even where there are several attachments on the obligor's salary, the maintenance claim is satisfied first, and salary may be attached up to the amount of current maintenance.
On the creditor's complaint, the enforcement criminal court may order coercive detention of up to three months against an obligor who fails to pay maintenance. For this sanction, the enforcement proceedings must be final, the payment order must have been served and there must be maintenance debt for at most the three months preceding the complaint.
| Procedure | Legal basis | Key period / condition |
|---|---|---|
| Maintenance action after divorce | Art. 178 TMK | Within 1 year of the judgment becoming final |
| Competent court | Art. 177 TMK | Family court of the maintenance creditor's residence |
| Adjustment of maintenance | Art. 331 TMK | Subject to a change in circumstances |
| Complaint for coercive detention | Art. 344 İİK | Debt for at most the preceding 3 months |
Frequently Asked Questions About Maintenance Claims
Is a separate request needed for maintenance when a divorce action is filed?
No separate request is required for interim maintenance. Under Article 169 TMK, the judge takes the necessary provisional measures of their own motion to provide for the spouse and children during the divorce case. For poverty and child maintenance, however, an express request is advisable; requesting poverty maintenance expressly is particularly important for the course of the case.
Can a spouse who is fully at fault claim poverty maintenance?
No. Under Article 175 TMK, the fault of the spouse claiming poverty maintenance must not be “heavier” than the other's. Maintenance may be claimed where fault is equal or lesser, but the claim of a spouse with heavier or full fault is rejected even if they will fall into poverty. The other party need not be at fault.
Can a spouse with a regular income receive poverty maintenance?
As a rule, no. According to settled Court of Cassation case law, the claim of a spouse with a regular and continuous income who will not fall into poverty because of the divorce is rejected. Sources such as a pension, permanent civil-service employment or continuous business income are assessed in this context. Where the income is far from covering basic needs, the judge may exercise discretion.
What happens to child maintenance when the child turns 18?
Child maintenance ends by law when the child comes of age. If the child's education continues, however, the child may personally file an action for support (education) maintenance under Articles 328/2 and 364 TMK. A child at university, in postgraduate or vocational education without sufficient income may claim support maintenance from the parents.
I did not claim maintenance in the divorce case. Can I claim it later?
Yes, through an independent action. Under Article 178 TMK, however, the action must be filed within one year of the divorce judgment becoming final; this is a limitation period, so the action is dismissed if the other party raises the limitation defence. You can file the action before the family court of your own place of residence.
Can the amount of maintenance be increased over time?
Yes. Under Article 331 TMK, the amount may be redetermined if circumstances change. Inflation, rising education and health costs as the child grows and an extraordinary increase in the obligor's income are valid grounds for an adjustment action. The court may take consumer and producer price indices into account or, depending on actual needs, order an increase above the index.
Can a person who does not pay maintenance face detention?
Yes. Under Article 344 İİK, on the creditor's complaint, the enforcement criminal court may order coercive detention of up to three months against a person who fails to pay maintenance in final enforcement proceedings. The complaint may cover maintenance debt for at most the preceding three months. Detention ends when the debt is paid.
Maintenance claims are one part of wider family-law disputes; for the overall legal framework, see our Antalya family law page.
