How Is Child Maintenance Collected from a Mother or Father Living Abroad?

Research date: October 11, 2026

A mother's or father's residence abroad does not remove the obligation to pay child maintenance. To collect, however, it must first be determined whether a maintenance decision exists, in which country it was issued, and where the debtor's income and assets are located. Enforcement against assets in Türkiye, recognition and enforcement of the decision in a foreign country, and the making of a new decision through central authorities are different routes. The applicable convention, the child's age and the country where the debtor is located directly affect this choice. [1] [2] [3]

First step: how are the maintenance decision and the country of collection identified?

There is no single answer applying to every country to the question "how is maintenance obtained from a father living abroad?" The same rules apply where the maintenance debtor is the mother. First the operative part of the existing decision must be read; the creditor, the debtor, the child, the start date, the amount, the currency and any conditions for increase must each be extracted separately. A custody decision concerning a child does not by itself establish a maintenance claim of a fixed amount.

This distinction also prevents a second maintenance action being brought unnecessarily. Enforcement of an existing decision and an increase of maintenance are different claims. The same maintenance debt for the same period cannot be collected separately in two countries; every payment made in parallel proceedings must be notified to the other file as well. The domestic conditions for an increase claim are dealt with in the article on the maintenance increase action. [2] [3]

From whom and under what conditions can child maintenance be claimed?

The incomes of the mother and father are assessed together

Where Turkish law applies, both the mother and the father contribute to the child's care, education and protection expenses. The parent who actually looks after the child may bring a maintenance action against the other on the child's behalf. The power of representation, the position of custody or guardianship, and any conflict of interest are examined separately; no application may be framed on the basis that only the mother is the claimant and only the father the debtor in every case. Article 329 TMK also allows a minor with the capacity of discernment to bring their own maintenance action. Types of maintenance and their conditions can be seen together in the article types of maintenance and their conditions. [1]

The amount of maintenance depends on the child's needs, the living conditions and payment capacity of the mother and father, and the child's own income. School and health expenses, a share of housing, food and transport costs must be documented. A high gross wage abroad cannot be treated as actual capacity to pay without assessing compulsory tax and living costs. On the other hand, a bare statement "I am unemployed abroad" does not replace an investigation of income and assets. Turkish law contains no fixed percentage of salary applicable to every file. [1]

What changes when the child reaches 18?

Under Article 328 TMK, the duty of care in principle lasts until majority. If education continues, support may be requested from the mother and father to the end of education, to the extent that can be expected in the circumstances. It should not be assumed that a child maintenance decision made for a minor continues indefinitely merely because a student certificate is presented. The adult child's own claim, the scope of the existing decision and any new legal basis are assessed. The adult student's claim is separately examined in the article maintenance after 18. [1]

Two age limits must not be confused here: which applications an international convention assists is one matter, and up to which age the right to maintenance continues is another. The fact that the convention covers persons under 21, or that Türkiye has made a declaration concerning persons under 25, does not by itself mean that maintenance is payable up to that age. [3] [5]

Even in the enforcement of a foreign decision in Türkiye, the Turkish criterion of majority is not applied alone. Article 32(4) of the 2007 Convention gives effect to the rules applicable in the State where the decision was made concerning the duration of the obligation. The age or stage of education up to which the foreign decision requires payment must therefore also be read separately. [3]

Which country's law and which convention apply?

The competent court and the applicable law are not the same thing

The fact that a Turkish court may hear a case does not mean that it will apply Turkish law in every instance. Article 1(2) MÖHUK preserves international conventions, and Article 19 MÖHUK takes as its basis the law of the habitual residence of the maintenance creditor. The 1973 Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Maintenance Obligations, to which Türkiye is a party, also essentially uses this connection; its subsidiary conflict rules and reservations may change the result. This text differs from the recognition and enforcement convention of the same date. [2] [6]

Habitual residence is not determined merely by the population or consular address; the actual centre of the child's life is investigated. School, health, housing and relocation records are therefore important. A Turkish judge examines of his or her own motion the foreign law to be applied and may request the parties' assistance in determining its content. The fact that foreign law differs from Turkish law is not in itself a reason for its non-application. [2]

The 1973 applicable-law convention is structured so that the law it designates may be applied even where that law is that of a State that is not a party. By contrast, the cooperation regime of the 2007 collection convention rests on relations between States parties. Türkiye is a party to the 2007 collection convention; it is not a party to the Protocol on the Law Applicable to Maintenance Obligations adopted in the same year. The two texts cannot be used in place of each other. [3] [6] [7] [8]

What does the 2007 Hague Maintenance Convention provide?

The 2007 Convention entered into force for Türkiye on 1 February 2017. In addition to the recognition and enforcement of an existing decision, it covers the making of a new decision where its conditions are met, assistance in establishing parentage, the modification of a decision and the location of the debtor. The convention, however, does not make every court of every country competent in every application. The relevant jurisdictional rules also apply to claims for a new decision and for modification. [3] [4]

The HCCH record examined on 11 October 2026 lists Germany, France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States as included in the convention. However, being a "European country" or an "EU member" is not in itself a sufficient statement. On the date of application, the relationship of entry into force between the two countries, the declarations and reservations of the country concerned, and any territorial limits of application must be checked. The deposit of an instrument of accession by a State does not necessarily mean that the convention enters into force for that State on the same date. [4]

The core scope of child maintenance under the convention concerns persons who have not reached the age of 21; States may enter a reservation limiting this to persons under 18. Türkiye has made a declaration extending the scope to children under 25 who continue their education. To the extent that an extended scope matches the declaration of the other State, it operates reciprocally. For this reason, the application of a 23-year-old university student should not be prepared on the assumption that it will be accepted on the same conditions as that of a 12-year-old child. [3] [5]

If the 2007 Convention does not apply, is collection impossible?

No. The 1956 New York Convention, the 1958 and 1973 Hague recognition and enforcement conventions, bilateral agreements and the domestic law of the country concerned are examined. The 2007 Convention replaces earlier texts only as between States and within the common scope set out in its own provisions. It does not abolish all earlier conventions for all countries. [3] [9]

Where no suitable convention exists, recognition and enforcement under the domestic law of the foreign country may be relevant, or, where its conditions are met, a new maintenance action. Cost and enforceability are assessed under the law of the country where the debtor is located. The absence of cooperation between authorities abroad does not automatically remove the option of resorting to the debtor's attachable assets in Türkiye.

The age of the decision also does not on its own close the route of the 2007 Convention. Under the transitional provisions of Article 56, the date on which the application is received and the entry into force for the States concerned are taken into account. The restriction introduced for instalments falling due before entry into force, and the exception concerning parent–child obligations for persons under 21, must be examined separately. [3]

If there is no maintenance decision yet, which route should be followed?

If an action is to be brought in Türkiye, international jurisdiction is determined first. Article 40 MÖHUK refers to the territorial jurisdictional rules of domestic law. The place of residence of the defendant is the general connection of jurisdiction; in maintenance actions brought after divorce, the place of residence of the maintenance creditor is also important under Article 177 TMK. The claim within a divorce, an independent child maintenance claim and an adult child's claim should not be regarded as the same type of file. These family-law disputes fall within the duties of the family courts; where there is no family court, the civil court of first instance designated for that purpose acts. [1] [2] [10] [11]

Where the conditions of the convention are met, a request may also be made for a new decision to be made in the requested State through the central authority of the State in which the applicant resides. Article 10 of the 2007 Convention provides for this possibility; it cannot be said that an action must always first be brought in Türkiye where no existing decision exists. If parentage has not been established, its determination may also be considered together with the subject of the application. [3]

Where the child's present needs cannot wait until the end of the proceedings, interim protection should be considered. Under Article 332 TMK, in a maintenance action the necessary measures may be taken, and where parentage has been established, an appropriate maintenance sum may be deposited or paid on an interim basis. In situations such as continuous breach of the obligation, preparation to flee, or extravagant consumption of assets, security for future maintenance and other measures may be requested under Article 334. These must be justified by concrete facts; living abroad alone is not evidence of bad faith. [1]

A pending divorce action between foreign spouses is described in our article divorce in Türkiye for those living abroad and for foreign spouses.

How is a maintenance decision made in Türkiye collected abroad?

First, the assets in Türkiye are examined

Where the debtor has a bank account, a property, a vehicle, a rental receivable or other attachable assets in Türkiye, these may be reached through the appropriate enforcement proceedings. First it is examined whether the decision is capable of enforcement: a standalone maintenance provision, an interim measure and a child maintenance provision dependent on the finality of the divorce should not be treated as enforceable at the same stage. [1] [11] [12]

An enforcement file in Türkiye does not give a direct power of attachment over the employer or bank abroad in the same way as it does within Türkiye. Access to wages and accounts abroad depends on the completion of the necessary recognition and enforcement steps in that country and on its local attachment rules. A general promise that the debtor's entire income, or a fixed quarter of it, will in every case be deducted cannot be given. [3]

Where is the central authority application made?

In Türkiye, the central authority function is performed by the Directorate General for Foreign Relations and EU Affairs of the Ministry of Justice. The official statement of the Maintenance Office indicates that the procedures are carried out through the Chief Public Prosecutor's Offices. An applicant in Türkiye may start the process of preparing the application file through the local Chief Public Prosecutor's Office and its transmission to the Ministry. Making this application through the prosecutor's office does not automatically mean a criminal investigation or a request for coercive imprisonment. [9]

Under the 2007 Convention, the application is made through the central authority of the State of the applicant's habitual residence. Where the child and the applicant parent live abroad, the existence of a citizenship link with Türkiye does not mean that all applications must necessarily be sent from Türkiye. The central authority of the State of residence and the State to which the request will be directed must be determined. [3]

The order of the process is as follows:

• The decision, the child and debtor details and the applicable convention are identified.
• A form, a debt statement and documents appropriate to the type of claim are prepared.
• The file is sent to the relevant central authority; omissions and requests for additional documents are followed up.
• The competent authority in the foreign country carries out recognition, the establishment of a decision or enforcement.
• The amount collected, the payment period and the remaining debt are compared and the file is updated.

The convention also preserves the possibility of applying directly to the foreign competent authority. However, the fees and the conditions for legal aid of the direct route chosen through a private lawyer are not the same as those under the central authority route. The two options should be compared in light of the assets capable of collection and the specific procedural need. [3] [8]

Which documents are required for an international maintenance application?

Adding only the first page of the divorce judgment to the file is not sufficient. In particular, the maintenance provision, enforceability, the right of defence and the debt calculation must be consistent with one another. The documents are completed according to the applicable convention, the type of claim and the notification requirements of the requested State. [3] [9]

Is an apostille required in every file?

No. Article 41 of the 2007 Convention provides that no legalisation or similar formality is required within the scope of the convention. For this reason an apostille requirement cannot be added automatically to every maintenance document. Nevertheless, a certified copy of the decision, a certificate of enforceability and the necessary translations may still be requested. Türkiye requires, under Article 25(3), a complete copy of the decision certified by the competent authority. Documents outside the convention, or certification conditions under other legal regimes, are assessed separately. [3] [5]

The language of translation is not English in every country either. The official language of the requested State, the other languages it accepts and the convention notifications should be checked. A comprehensive file prepared in the wrong language may cause the expense and delay of re-translation. [3]

Can an application be made if the debtor's address is unknown?

The fact that the full address is not known does not prevent an application in every case. Articles 6–7 of the 2007 Convention cover assistance in establishing the location, income and assets of the debtor. The last known address, the date of birth, the former employer and other distinguishing information obtained lawfully should be provided. However, cooperation between States is not unlimited access to all records, nor a guarantee that the debtor will certainly be found. [3]

Where there is a risk of violence or of pursuit, a secure contact address and the protection of personal data must be expressly stated in the application. Articles 38–40 of the convention restrict the use and disclosure of data and provide protection where statements create a risk to health, safety or liberty. The school address and identity documents of the child should not be shared on the open internet. [3]

How is a foreign maintenance decision enforced in Türkiye?

Recognition, enforcement and a new action must be kept apart

Recognition concerns the acceptance of the legal effect of a foreign decision; enforcement concerns its being capable of enforcement by force in Türkiye. The mere recognition of a divorce decision does not show that the maintenance in the foreign decision is also automatically enforceable in Türkiye. The maintenance provision and the scope of the enforcement must be examined separately. [2]

The applicable convention has priority. Under the general MÖHUK regime, Articles 50–54 govern the nature and finality of the foreign court decision and the conditions of reciprocity, jurisdiction, public policy and the right of defence. In an enforcement action concerning family maintenance, the family court is competent. As regards territory, under Article 51 MÖHUK the debtor's place of residence in Türkiye is considered, or failing that the place where he or she resides; failing both, connections with Ankara, Istanbul or İzmir are assessed. [2] [10]

Where the 2007 Convention applies, under Article 20(6) recognition requires the decision to be effective in the State in which it was made, and enforcement requires that it be enforceable there. The finality condition of the general law cannot be carried across unchanged to every application under the convention. Likewise, an enforcement action cannot be converted into a new maintenance action by recalculating the amount, because Article 28 prohibits examination of the merits. Where the amount needs to be changed, the appropriate separate route of application is assessed. [3]

Court of Cassation: the New York Convention does not mean direct enforcement

In its decision of 25 October 2018, E.2016/20654, K.2018/10592, the Third Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 3. Hukuk Dairesi) dealt with the enforcement in Türkiye of a child maintenance decision made in Germany. The first-instance court had accepted that the decision could be enforced directly by virtue of the 1956 New York Convention and had dismissed the enforcement claim for lack of legal interest. The Chamber did not consider this approach appropriate and quashed the decision for correction in the interest of the law, without affecting the outcome. [13]

The practical importance of the decision is that it rejects the assumption that the assistance available between States removes the need for the necessary recognition and enforcement procedure. The decision is not a judgment ordering payment directly to the applicant. Moreover, in files where the 2007 Convention now applies, its specific conditions must be examined separately.

Türkiye's special declarations and the effect of remedies

Türkiye has chosen the alternative procedure for recognition and enforcement under Article 24 of the 2007 Convention. Accordingly, the model under Article 23 and its 30- and 60-day objection periods cannot automatically be applied to all files concerning Türkiye. The route and the time limit must be determined by the procedure applied and the decision notified. [3] [5]

Under the general provision of Article 57 MÖHUK, an appeal against the decision of enforcement suspends its execution. By contrast, Article 24(6) of the 2007 Convention provides that, under this special procedure, an appeal does not as a rule suspend enforcement, and suspension is possible only in exceptional cases. Both generalisations, "no step may be taken until the enforcement decision becomes final" and "an appeal never suspends", are therefore misleading. [2] [3]

Türkiye's reservation concerning maintenance arrangements under Article 30 is also important. However, not every court-approved agreement or foreign administrative document can automatically be placed in this group. It must first be determined whether the document is a decision within the meaning of Article 19 or a maintenance arrangement within the meaning of Article 30. The authority that made the document, its power of review and its legal effect are as decisive as its name. [3] [5]

Why is an earlier action and the right of defence important?

In its decision of 13 March 2023, E.2022/10198, K.2023/980, the Second Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 2. Hukuk Dairesi) dealt with a dispute over the recognition and enforcement of a temporary custody and maintenance decision made in France. The regional appellate court, which also considered an action previously brought in Türkiye, dismissed the claim, and the Chamber affirmed that refusal. As regards maintenance, the 1973 Convention on the recognition and enforcement of maintenance decisions was discussed. [14]

This example shows the importance of adding to the file the date, parties and subject of the earlier action. Not every temporary maintenance decision may be concluded to be incapable of enforcement; the rules of the relevant convention on temporary or enforceable decisions must be assessed separately. Article 22 of the 2007 Convention also governs grounds for refusal such as an earlier pending proceeding, conflicting decisions and the absence of an opportunity to defend. [3] [14]

How is accrued maintenance, interest and currency calculated?

Accrued maintenance should not be presented merely as a single total figure. For each period, the amount due under the decision, any increase, the payments made and the remaining balance must be shown. An annual increase rate not contained in the decision cannot be added automatically. Where there is indexation, the date on which it applied and the criterion used must be documented. [3]

Hypothetical example: if monthly maintenance is EUR 600, the period under review is six months, and the total payments credited to that period amount to EUR 1,000, the principal balance is 3,600 − 1,000 = EUR 2,600. This calculation assumes that there is no increase; it does not include interest, transfer costs or litigation expenses. In a real file, the payment explanations and the month to which each payment was allocated are examined separately.

Where the decision was given in euros or another currency, the statement of the debt must first be set up in the currency of the decision. In the collection in Türkiye, the form of the claim, the exchange rate and interest are determined by reference to the content of the decision, the provisions on foreign-currency debts and the enforcement rules taken together. Converting all past instalments at a current online exchange rate at random does not produce a correct statement of the debt. [12] [15]

Where a state institution makes maintenance payments in place of the parent, the right to collect may pass in part to that institution. Not every social assistance payment counts as a maintenance payment; the type of assistance and the rules on recourse must be examined. Article 36 of the 2007 Convention also governs the rights of public bodies. The same debt should not be claimed twice, both in the name of the child and in the name of the institution that made the payment. [3]

A standard ten- or five-year period cannot reliably be applied to every file as a limitation period. Under Article 32(5) of the 2007 Convention, for enforcement of accrued maintenance, the longer period of the law of the State in which the decision was made or of the law of the requested State applies. Periods, starting points, and the grounds for interruption or suspension are calculated separately. It should not be assumed that sending a file to the central authority will interrupt limitation in every country. [3]

How long does an application take and who pays the costs?

Notification periods are not collection periods

The first three rows of the table are based on Article 12 of the 2007 Convention. Difficulties of service, the need for a new decision, objections, income inquiries and the debtor's ability to pay all affect the total period. Acceptance of an application and the actual collection of money are different stages. [3]

What is the scope of free legal assistance?

The 2007 Convention generally provides for the services of central authorities free of charge; for certain special measures requested, exceptional expenses requiring prior acceptance may arise. For applications made by the creditor through the central authority concerning a parent–child relationship with a person under 21, there are strong guarantees of free legal assistance. The categories of application, the distinctions in Articles 15–17 and the State declarations must nevertheless be examined. [3]

This guarantee does not mean that the fee of every private lawyer chosen by the applicant will be paid by the State, or that every translation will be carried out free of charge in all circumstances. In particular, for an adult student in education, a direct application, and claims based on an extension of scope, the regime of costs and assistance must be separately checked. The prohibition on security under the convention is also observed; general rules on security for foreign claimants cannot automatically be applied. In non-convention claims in Türkiye, the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code (HMK) and MÖHUK and the exemptions for legal aid are assessed. [2] [3] [11]

How are the debtor's objections and non-payment of maintenance assessed?

Payment, loss of income and modification of maintenance

The debtor may assert that the debt has been paid, by means of a receipt and a statement of the period; the applicant must also specify that the payments are incomplete or relate to another debt. Irregular notification, the grounds for refusal that may apply and claims of conflicting decisions are essential issues in the file. An enforcement review does not entirely remove the debtor's defence, but neither is the merits of the original action examined afresh. [2] [3]

Loss of employment or a change in the child's needs may give rise to a claim for modification of maintenance where the conditions are met. In Turkish law Article 331 TMK provides for this possibility. The bringing of a modification action does not mean that the debt under the existing provision is automatically extinguished. Article 18 of the 2007 Convention restricts, under certain conditions, attempts by the debtor to modify decisions made in the creditor's State of habitual residence in another State; the exceptions are examined separately. [1] [3]

For a claim of increase, see our article on the maintenance increase action against a parent living abroad.

Does coercive imprisonment replace international collection?

No. If, in Türkiye, the conditions of Article 344 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (İİK) are met against a debtor who does not comply with the requirement of a maintenance decision, coercive imprisonment of up to three months may arise on the creditor's complaint. This outcome does not arise merely from the preparation of a debt statement; the enforcement, service, the nature of the breach and the period for complaint are examined. Article 347 İİK sets a limit of three months from learning of the breach and, in any event, one year from the act. [12] This topic is also explained in our article on coercive imprisonment for breach of maintenance.

Three months does not mean that, in every file, three months of maintenance must first have accrued; it is an upper limit on the sanction. This route is not a substitute for an attachment of wages, enforcement or a collection application abroad. A coercive imprisonment order is not a guarantee that money will certainly be collected from the debtor abroad.

If contact with the child is prevented, can maintenance be stopped?

Personal contact with the child and maintenance are separate legal obligations. An allegation that contact has been obstructed does not justify the unilateral non-performance of an existing maintenance decision. An appropriate application must be made for the enforcement or modification of the contact decision. Likewise, where the child has been taken abroad unlawfully, the return process is assessed separately; collection of maintenance does not by itself determine the outcome of the return action. [1]

For the types of maintenance and the general framework of applications in Türkiye, the firm's maintenance law explanations may also be consulted. In a cross-border file, however, this general framework must be completed by examining the country concerned and the convention.

For the exercise of the right of contact from abroad, see our article on the right of a parent living abroad to contact the child.

Conclusion

In collecting child maintenance from abroad, the correct starting point is first to identify the decision and the collectable assets. Enforcement possibilities in Türkiye, assistance from the central authority, recognition and enforcement in a foreign country, and the making of a new maintenance decision are not the same procedure. The route to be followed must be chosen by reference to the treaty relationship between the two countries, the age of the child, the nature of the decision and the applicant's status.

In a sound file, the complete decision, the enforceability and notification documents, the debt statement by period, payment records and correct translations complement one another. In particular, the age scope under the 2007 Convention, the exemption from certification, legal assistance, the effect of an appeal and the distinctions on limitation must not be overlooked. This preparation reduces the risk of procedural defects and duplicate collection; actual collection, however, depends on the debtor's income, assets and the enforcement procedures of the relevant country.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can child maintenance be obtained from a father living in Germany?

Yes. Depending on the child's age and the conditions of the convention between the two countries, recognition and enforcement of the existing decision, or a request for a new decision, may be sought through the central authority. The debtor's attachable assets in Türkiye may also be assessed separately. Related explanation

If the maintenance debtor is the mother, can the same routes be used?

Yes. The obligation does not depend on the sex of the parent. Where Turkish law applies, the mother or father who actually looks after the child may claim a contribution to the child's expenses from the other parent; representation and payment capacity are examined. Related explanation

If the child is at university, does maintenance continue automatically until age 25?

No. The conditions of the right to support on account of education, the existing provision and the application of the adult child are assessed. Türkiye's declaration concerning persons under 25 operates to the extent it matches the scope of the other State; it does not by itself create a new right to maintenance or an automatic extension. Related explanation

Can an application be made through the Ministry of Justice without a maintenance decision?

Where the conditions of the 2007 Convention are met, an application may be made for a new maintenance decision to be made. Its acceptance is assessed together with the jurisdictional rules of the country concerned and the necessary documents; an application to the central authority does not itself create a maintenance decision. Related explanation

What can I do if I do not know the address of the debtor abroad?

You may request, with the last known address, identity and employer information, assistance in investigating the address and assets under the convention. The absence of an address does not prevent every application; however, it cannot be guaranteed that the investigation will succeed. Related explanation

Is it necessary to obtain an apostille for all documents?

No. The exemption from certification under the 2007 Convention should be taken into account. The obligations relating to certified copies and the necessary translations may continue; other regimes or document types are assessed separately. Related explanation

Is it necessary to travel abroad in order to apply?

Not in every application. The central authority system allows the application to be transmitted through the State of residence. Participation, representation or additional procedural requirements in the particular case are determined by the procedure of the foreign competent authority. Related explanation

Can accrued maintenance also be collected from abroad?

Yes; accrued instalments may also be claimed within the conditions of the applicable decision and of the time limits. The debt and payment for each month should be shown separately; where the 2007 Convention applies, the longer-period rule of Article 32(5) must be taken into account when assessing limitation. Related explanation

Does an application to the central authority ensure payment within three months?

No. The three-month status-reporting period under the convention is not the period for completing collection. Service, court and enforcement proceedings and the debtor's ability to pay affect the result. Related explanation

Can I put a foreign maintenance decision directly into enforcement in Türkiye?

A foreign decision is not automatically enforced by a Turkish enforcement office merely because a convention exists. The recognition and enforcement conditions of the applicable convention or of the general regime must be met; the recognition of a divorce alone is not regarded as sufficient for maintenance. Related explanation

Sources and legal bases

1. Turkish Civil Code No. 4721, in particular Articles 177, 182, 323 and 327–334. Current text of the law.
2. Private International and Procedural Law No. 5718, in particular Articles 1–2, 19, 40, 48 and 50–58. Current text of the law.
3. HCCH, Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance, 23 November 2007; in particular Articles 2, 6–18, 19–25, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36–44, 48–49 and 56. Full text of the Convention.
4. HCCH, status and entry-into-force table of the 2007 Maintenance Convention. Current status table. Reviewed: 11 October 2026.
5. HCCH, declarations and reservations of Türkiye relating to the 2007 Maintenance Convention, in particular Articles 2(3), 24, 25(3) and 30. Türkiye's notifications.
6. HCCH, Convention on the Law Applicable to Maintenance Obligations, 2 October 1973, in particular Articles 3–6 and 14–15. Full text; Türkiye's reservations.
7. HCCH, status table of the Protocol on the Law Applicable to Maintenance Obligations of 2007. Status table. Reviewed: 11 October 2026.
8. Mesut Aygün and Gözde Çağlayan Aygün, "The Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance" (Çocuk Nafakası ve Diğer Aile Nafaka Türlerinin Uluslararası Tahsiline İlişkin La Haye Sözleşmesi), İnönü University Faculty of Law Review (İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi), 2018, 9(2), pp. 71–102; in particular pp. 75–83. DOI: 10.21492/inuhfd.424598. Article.
9. Ministry of Justice, Directorate General for Foreign Relations and EU Affairs, Maintenance Office; maintenance procedures, conventions and forms; Circular No. 64/2, 16 November 2011, in particular Part II, I/10. Circular. The circular is an earlier text, predating the entry into force of the 2007 Convention in Türkiye.
10. Law No. 4787 on the Establishment, Duties and Trial Procedures of Family Courts, Articles 2 and 4. Current text of the law.
11. Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100, in particular Articles 6, 84–85, 334–335, 350 and 367. Current text of the law.
12. Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law No. 2004, in particular Articles 58, 78, 89, 344 and 347. Current text of the law.
13. Third Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 3. Hukuk Dairesi), 25 October 2018, E.2016/20654, K.2018/10592; Official Gazette (Resmî Gazete), 26 January 2019, no. 30667. Official full text, PDF pp. 1–3.
14. Second Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 2. Hukuk Dairesi), 13 March 2023, E.2022/10198, K.2023/980. Secondary publication of the full text, Consulto Hukuk. Related provision: 1973 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions Relating to Maintenance Obligations, Articles 4–5.
15. Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098, Article 99. Current text of the law.