Airport Transfer and Tour Bus Accidents in Türkiye: The Rights of a Foreign Tourist and the Liability of the Carrier, Hotel, Agency and Insurer

What legal disputes does an airport transfer or tour bus accident give rise to?

The legal nature of the transfer affects the outcome of the accident

Transport from the airport to the hotel may be more than just a vehicle journey. The tourist may have bought the transport for a separate price, had it included in the accommodation booking, obtained it as part of a package tour, or used the hotel’s free shuttle. This distinction determines who the party to the contract of carriage is, on whose behalf the service was undertaken and which transaction the travel agency committed to. That a company’s name appears on the invoice or the booking document does not in itself show that it is the vehicle operator or the carrier; but it is important evidence for establishing contractual liability.

Different claims may be raised in the same incident

Injury, temporary or permanent incapacity for work, the need for care, a cut-short journey, damage to luggage, additional accommodation and treatment costs are different heads of loss. On the one hand, if there is negligent injury or death, a criminal investigation is conducted; on the other, monetary claims arise before the civil court or, where the legislation allows, through insurance dispute resolution. The existence of a criminal file does not by itself suspend every private-law claim.

First steps to take after the accident

Emergency care and the official record come first

First, emergency medical care should be reached; medically necessary examination, imaging and treatment must not be delayed. In the notification of the incident to law enforcement and in the traffic accident recording process, the vehicle plates, the drivers, witnesses, police or gendarmerie records, and the location and time should be established. Because an official traffic report may be needed, depending on the number of injured, the nature of the incident or disputed circumstances, one should not rely only on the accident report for material damage drawn up between insurers.

Which records should be preserved before evidence is lost?

• The booking confirmation, transfer voucher, package tour contract, payment receipt and correspondence with the hotel.
• The vehicle plate, the driver’s identity, the transport authorisation document and, if possible, the policy details.
• Photographs of the accident scene, details of the other passengers, location data and requests for the preservation of security camera footage.
• The ambulance call, 112 records, emergency room triage, discharge summary (epicrisis), radiology, operation and prescription documents.
• Treatment records after the tourist’s return abroad, sick-leave reports, income documents and statements from the employer.

Because images and digital records may be deleted automatically, it is important to send a written preservation request to the relevant institution or data controller at the earliest possible stage. Obtaining the evidence must comply with the rules on the protection of personal data and the confidentiality of the investigation.

Related article: Charging of High Treatment Fees to a Foreign Tourist at a Hospital in Türkiye: Emergency Care, Invoice, Travel Insurance and Refund of the Fee.

Under what conditions are the driver and the vehicle operator liable?

Liability arising from the driver’s act

Driving in breach of traffic rules, speeding, inattention, faulty overtaking, breach of following distance, fatigue, ignoring technical warnings and failing to take appropriate precautions against a foreseeable danger are assessed in the fault inquiry. As to the driver, TBK Article 49 and, depending on the specific circumstances, the relevant criminal provisions may come into play. Fault is not settled only by the ratio in the initial traffic report; it can be clarified through a technical expert examination.

The operator’s strict liability

Article 85 of the Highway Traffic Law (Karayolları Trafik Kanunu, KTK) No. 2918 provides for the liability of the operator and, under the statutory conditions, of the associated enterprise, where the operation of a motor vehicle causes a person’s death or injury. The vehicle owner and the operator are not always the same person. Actual control, economic benefit, and on whose account and at whose risk the vehicle was operated are investigated. The exceptions and the conditions for exoneration are assessed separately within the framework of KTK Article 86; the defence that the causal link with the operation was broken must not be left abstract.

The carrier’s contractual liability

The duty to carry the passenger safely under TTK Article 914

Article 914 of the Turkish Commercial Code (TTK) No. 6102 regulates the carrier’s obligation to bring the passenger safely to the destination and to take the necessary precautions. When the carrier’s liability in a passenger accident is examined, the existence of the contract, the relationship of the incident with the carriage activity, the causes of the accident and whether there was an event that could not have been avoided even with the utmost care are assessed. It is possible to combine this contractual basis with the operator’s liability under the KTK; but the elements and the burden of proof of each provision remain separate.

TTK Article 854: ticket and contract terms that exclude the carrier’s liability in advance

Article 854 of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 treats contract terms that exclude or lessen in advance the liability the Code imposes on the carrier, on the freight-forwarding agent and on carriage undertakings whose activities depend on state authorisation as invalid. It does not change the result that such a limitation appears in a transfer voucher, a bus ticket, a booking condition, an electronic confirmation screen, standard terms or a tariff. Accordingly, reliance on a clause the tourist confirmed before the accident, such as “the carrier is not liable for any bodily harm”, does not by itself constitute a sufficient defence of non-liability.

A clause releasing liability before the accident and a settlement or release (ibra) made after the accident over a specific claim are not the same transaction. The scope of a payment and release document signed after the incident, whether the person was informed, the actual payment, defects of will and, in particular, the special provisions in KTK Article 111 are examined separately. A tourist’s signing a document prepared in a foreign language does not by itself mean that he or she has validly waived all of his or her claims. As evidence, the two-language text of the document, the delivery and translation records, the date of signature and the bank record of the payment should be preserved.

Distinguishing a free shuttle from a subcontractor

That the service is not invoiced separately to the passenger does not change the fact that transport may be a principal or an ancillary performance under the accommodation contract. Nevertheless, whether there is a commercial contract of carriage, who the carrier is and which special provision applies must be derived from the specific relationship. A hotel’s having the transfer carried out by an independent outside company does not mean that the hotel is in every case released from liability or in every case remains liable; TBK Articles 112 and 116 and the relevant consumer provisions are examined separately.

Are the hotel operator and the travel agency liable in every accident?

The service the hotel undertook by contract is decisive

It matters for liability whether the hotel carried out the transfer with its own staff or vehicle, whether it promised a safe transport organisation, or whether it breached the duty of care that can be imposed on it in selecting and supervising the transfer company. The mere fact that arrival at the hotel was planned is not sufficient to attribute all the acts of another company involved in the accident directly to the hotel.

The package tour organiser and the intermediary

If the transfer forms part of a package tour service, the performance liability of the organiser and of the intermediary is assessed within the framework of Article 51 of Law No. 6502 and the Regulation on Package Tour Contracts. If the conduct of an independent service provider results in the package tour not being properly performed, a liability claim is possible. By contrast, the fact that an independent transfer outside the scope of the contract was bought only from the agency does not automatically lead to the same result; the agency’s capacity, the information it gave, the sales terms and the performances it undertook must be proven.

Distinguishing service fault, the agency’s capacity and security in package tour liability

When the liability of the package tour organiser and the intermediary is assessed under Article 51 of Law No. 6502, whether the transfer is one of the principal or connected services within the package must be shown through the contract, the information form, the booking and the transfer documents. Under the Regulation on Package Tour Contracts, claims for damages for non-performance or improper performance against the organiser and the intermediary may constitute a legal basis separate from the independent carrier’s liability under traffic law. By contrast, an agency that merely provides a ticket or a transport link cannot automatically be held liable for all the consequences it did not undertake in the contract.

The insurance/security obligation under Law No. 1618 relating to improper performance of a package tour contract is not the same cover as compulsory motor third-party liability (traffic) insurance, compulsory seat personal accident insurance or a personal travel health insurance. In particular, there may be different legal grounds for the holiday not being able to continue because of an injury and for bodily harm; the same amount cannot be collected twice from two separate sources. The organiser–intermediary distinction, fault and the actual scope of the insurance policies must not be concluded on without being established.

How are insurers and types of insurance distinguished?

Compulsory financial liability insurance and the limits of cover

The vehicle operator’s compulsory financial liability insurance under Law No. 2918 covers certain losses within the law and the general conditions of the policy. Compulsory traffic insurance is not a guarantee that covers every head of loss without limit. The scope of the property and bodily injury covers on the date of the incident, the per-person and per-event limits, direct claims and policy exclusions are checked separately. As regards non-pecuniary damages, the cover of the compulsory policy and the scope of any voluntary financial liability policy must not be confused.

The error of relying on the old provisions of Law No. 4925

The former Articles 17–25 of the Highway Transport Law (Karayolu Taşıma Kanunu) No. 4925 were repealed in 2016 by Article 17 of Law No. 6704. For this reason, the notification, priority and time-limit provisions of the former “compulsory road transport financial liability insurance” regime cannot be presented as current law. Whether the current policy is actually in force, and the nature of the different covers issued under the name of compulsory seat personal accident insurance or voluntary insurance, must be documented separately.

Compulsory seat personal accident insurance and voluntary policies

In commercial passenger transport, whether compulsory seat personal accident insurance exists must be examined separately in terms of the type of vehicle, the authorisation document for the carriage and the period in which the policy was issued. The conditions under which cover arises in this insurance for events such as accidental death and disability must not be automatically equated with the cover of compulsory financial liability insurance, which depends on the driver’s fault. A separate table of policy–beneficiary–risk–limit should be built for personal accident insurance, traffic insurance, voluntary financial liability and package tour security.

The Guarantee Account for uninsured accidents or accidents in which the perpetrator cannot be identified

The Guarantee Account (Güvence Hesabı) under Article 14 of the Insurance Law (Sigortacılık Kanunu) No. 5684 may provide the possibility of application, as regards the compulsory insurances set by legislation, only in limited situations, such as bodily injury caused by persons responsible whose identity cannot be established, or bodily injury caused by persons who had no valid insurance on the date of the accident. This route is not a general and unlimited payment institution for all expenses, property damage and non-pecuniary damages in a traffic accident. The vehicle, how the traffic accident occurred, the fact of lack of insurance or non-identification, the health/death documents and the records showing the authority to pay should be assessed according to the application. That the operator or driver is found does not change the legal nature of the Guarantee Account or the conditions for applying to it; it must be stated clearly for which risk the application is made.

Prior application to the insurer

Under KTK Article 97, for claims within the limits of compulsory financial liability insurance, a written application to the insurance company concerned is required before an action is brought. If the insurer does not reply within 15 days at the latest of the application, or if the reply does not satisfy the claim, an action or insurance arbitration within the framework of Law No. 5684 comes into play. The application conditions, objections about missing documents and the defendant in respect of whom it is valid must not be confused.

The difference between the 15 days for applying to the insurer and the eight business days for payment

The 15-day period in KTK Article 97 relates to the opening of the route to action/arbitration where the insurer does not reply after the necessary written application or the dispute continues. The eight-business-day payment period in KTK Article 99 is assessed from the submission to the insurer of the documents required by law concerning the loss and the insurance cover. The first does not mean that the insurer must unconditionally pay every compensation on the 15th day; the second does not mean that there is a firm obligation to pay within eight business days despite an incomplete application.

In applying to the Insurance Arbitration Commission (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu), the pre-application conditions for compulsory traffic insurance and for the other insurance lines must be determined separately. The Insurance Arbitration Commission’s current application explanations are examined together with a 15-day assessment regime for compulsory traffic insurance and a 15-business-day assessment regime for other eligible insurance disputes. An application to arbitration does not mean that all claims against the operator, driver, hotel and agency will be decided in the same arbitration file.

Related article: Applying to the Insurer After a Traffic Accident: Documents, Time Limits and Short Payment.

How are a foreign tourist’s losses calculated?

Treatment, care and rehabilitation

The scope of bodily loss is assessed within the framework of TBK Article 54. For each of the initial treatment, surgery, physiotherapy, rehabilitation, transport, companion and care expenses, medical necessity, the invoice, causation and the amounts paid or payable must be proven. For the cost of healthcare services resulting from a traffic accident in Türkiye, KTK Article 98 and Article 10/4 of the Regulation on International Health Tourism and the Health of Tourists of 26.04.2025 establish a special regime: the cost of a service within the scope of its conditions is collected from the SGK and cannot be demanded directly from the patient. Treatment expenses incurred later in a foreign country do not automatically fall within this SGK cover; the routes of compensation from the person responsible or payment under travel insurance are assessed separately.

Temporary and permanent incapacity for work

That the tourist’s income is earned abroad does not remove the compensation claim. The payroll, tax records, employment contract, employer’s letter, social insurance document and medical reports are assessed together. In determining permanent disability, the report standard to be applied in Turkish proceedings, the date of the incident, the effect of the loss of working capacity on the occupation and the actuarial method are decisive. A foreign report whose source and verification conditions are unclear should not, on its own, be accorded conclusive evidentiary value.

Determining the loss of income in the temporary period

For the period during which the person could not work after the injury, the physician’s sick-leave reports, the employer’s records of wages or contributions actually cut off and any social insurance payments are compared. That the salary continued to be paid for a certain period in a foreign country must not be left out of the examination of the real economic loss and of possible set-off.

Determining permanent loss of occupational capacity

In calculating permanent incapacity for work, one does not look only at the diagnostic disability rate; the health assessment criterion applicable on the date of the incident, the occupation before the accident, the level of earnings, the permanent functional limitation and the occupational effects are examined together. If a report from a foreign country and the expert assessment in Türkiye conflict, a reasoned and verifiable comparison is required.

Foreign currency and exchange rate conversion

That the expense was incurred in foreign currency raises the questions in which currency the claim may be demanded and the rate of which date is to be applied. TBK Article 99 is assessed together with the origin and nature of the debt, the relief sought, the interest regime and the foreign element. If exchange-rate loss is also claimed separately, double recovery of the same loss is prevented.

Non-pecuniary damage and claims of family members

Under TBK Article 56, non-pecuniary damages may come into play on account of a violation of bodily integrity. In the case of serious bodily harm or death, the claims of relatives are subject to further conditions. The insurance cover, proof and limitation period may differ for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages.

TBK Article 55 after 31 July 2026: interest by period and proportional set-off

The provisions added to TBK Article 55 of Law No. 6098 by Article 18 of Law No. 7589 distinguish the start of interest, in compensation arising from a reduction or loss of working capacity and in compensation for loss of support, as regards the period in which the earnings of the injured person or of the supporting person are known and the period in which they are not known.

The period in which the earnings are known

For the total compensation calculated for the known-earnings period, the new provision introduced by Law No. 7589 provides that statutory interest is to run from the date of the tort or of the event causing the loss. The income and employment document is among the most important means of proof showing which period was actually calculated on known earnings.

The period in which the earnings are not known, and advance payment

For the total compensation for the unknown-earnings period, statutory interest from the date of the judgment has been adopted. In addition, for these compensations, proportional set-off of any amount paid for the purpose of performance until the investigation (tahkikat) begins, on the basis of the amount of compensation at the date of payment, is provided for. This rule does not mean that every kind of insurance amount paid will be set off by the same method and without any examination; the purpose of the payment, the head of loss and the payment date must be shown.

Application in time is mandatory: under paragraph nine of provisional Article 1 of Law No. 7589, the new TBK Article 55 provisions apply to torts and loss-causing events occurring after their entry into force on 31 July 2026. For accidents that occurred before this date, the previous provision continues to apply. Therefore, even in two actions filed on the same date, different interest and set-off results may arise depending on the date of the accident.

The evidentiary value of a foreign official health record and a private employer’s document

HMK Article 223 requires a Turkish translation of documents in a foreign language; Article 224 requires an assessment of the proper certification and, where necessary, apostille procedures for official documents prepared by foreign state authorities. A foreign hospital report, an official social insurance record and a private employer’s wage letter are not the same type of legal document. Who issued it, the signature, the nature of the document, the link to payment and verifiability must be established. An apostille does not by itself make the medical opinion of the report or the incapacity rate correct; proving the origin of the document and medical/actuarial review are separate stages.

Related article: Treatment Abroad, Loss of Working Capacity and Compensation Claims of a Foreign Tourist Injured in an Accident in Türkiye.

Fault, causation and the passenger’s conduct

Seat belt and contributory fault

A reduction cannot be made automatically without assessing whether the passenger used a seat belt, the effect of his or her own conduct on the occurrence or aggravation of the injury, and whether safe use was possible in the vehicle. A reduction under TBK Article 52 depends on showing a concrete causal contribution. The carrier’s driving fault and the conduct of the passenger alleged to have increased the injury are distinguished from each other.

Third-party fault and force majeure

A collision by another driver, bad weather conditions or a road defect do not release the carrier and operator in every case. The foreseeability of the incident, the possibility of avoiding it, the driver’s control, the technical condition of the vehicle and the conditions of exoneration of the special provision concerned are examined together.

Which technical and medical documents are at the centre of proof?

The scope and review of the fault report

The accident report, the expert report in the criminal file, vehicle data, brake marks, cameras, road geometry and, if any, vehicle tracking records should be compared. A report that merely states a percentage of fault may not be sufficient; the rule breached, the chronology of the incident and the causal link between the breach and the accident must be explained. Under TBK Article 74, the criminal court’s assessment of fault, the independence of the civil judge and the effect of final findings of material fact are assessed separately.

Preservation of evidence and protection of health data

If the vehicle and the accident site can still be examined, preservation of evidence under HMK Article 400 and following may be considered. The lawful obtaining of medical records is subject to appropriate limits in terms of the KVKK (personal data protection law) and patient confidentiality. In international correspondence and the submission of documents, the apostille/certification and translation conditions are investigated according to the nature of the foreign official document.

Limitation period, competent court and pre-action requirements

Not equating the periods incorrectly

KTK Article 109 provides, for claims for pecuniary damages arising from a motor vehicle accident, a limitation period of two years from the date on which the loss and the person liable became known and, in every case, ten years from the date of the accident, as well as the possibility of a longer criminal limitation period under the statutory conditions. However, it is wrong to apply a single period mechanically to every case in the case of claims based on a contract, non-pecuniary damages, an insurance relationship and claims based on special provisions. The start of the period, interruption, suspension and the defendant’s capacity must be examined separately.

TTK Article 855 and KTK Article 109: different limitation regimes for bodily harm and other losses

Under TTK Article 855/1, a ten-year limitation period is provided for claims arising from the death of a passenger or harm to his or her bodily integrity due to an accident during a carriage subject to the carriage provisions of the TTK; for other carriage losses, one year is, as a rule, provided. TTK Article 855/2 links the start of the period, in passenger carriage, to the date on which the passenger reached the place of arrival or, if he or she did not, the date on which he or she should have arrived. Paragraph six of the same article expressly reserves the limitation provisions of the Highway Traffic Law.

By contrast, for compensation of pecuniary losses arising from a motor vehicle accident, KTK Article 109 provides a two-year period tied to knowledge of the loss and of the person liable to pay compensation, and in every case a ten-year period starting from the date of the accident, and a longer criminal limitation period if its conditions are met. The periods of claims based on the contract of carriage, the operator’s liability, ticket/booking loss and the insurance debt cannot be treated as the same. Where more than one legal ground is raised, the basis of each, the subject of the claim, the defendant’s capacity, the date of knowledge and arrival, and any special provision should be placed in a separate table.

In particular, a foreign tourist’s leaving Türkiye, treatment being completed months later, or the permanent disability rate being finalised later does not automatically postpone all limitation start dates. If any step is to be taken regarding the suspension or interruption of limitation, it must be examined separately in respect of which claim and which counterparty an action, enforcement proceedings, an application to the insurer and settlement negotiations have legal effect. In this way, the temporary treatment loss, the permanent loss of working capacity and the separate claim arising from the package tour performance are prevented from being lost in a single period calculation.

Competent and territorially competent court

For claims based on a contract of carriage, a consumer transaction, a tort or an insurance contract, the jurisdiction of the commercial courts of first instance, consumer courts or general courts may differ; special laws and current case law are applied according to the specific legal characterisation. The jurisdiction rules in KTK Article 110 are assessed together with the HMK, the Consumer Protection Law (TKHK) and, where there is a foreign element, the MÖHUK provisions. Whether the obligation of mediation as a condition precedent to litigation exists must be checked separately according to the nature of the claim and the capacity of the parties.

Partial actions and increase of the claim after Law No. 7589

Article 19 of Law No. 7589 of 31 July 2026 repealed HMK Article 107. However, under paragraph ten of provisional Article 1 of the same Law, in actions filed before the repeal, the former Article 107 continues to apply. Therefore, in a file opened after 2026, the former action for an uncertain claim should not be relied on directly merely because the calculation of the loss requires an expert.

Under new HMK Article 109/4, where only part of a claim is sued on, the subject of the claim may be increased once in the same action, until the investigation (tahkikat) ends, without being subject to the prohibition on expanding the claim; the provision also provides that, as to the increased part, limitation is deemed interrupted as of the date of the action. Without a separate assessment of the date the action was filed, whether the investigation has ended, the head of the claim to be increased, court fees and non-pecuniary damages, this provision should not be seen as an unlimited possibility of increasing the claim. The application of this procedural provision in time is also determined under the entry-into-force and transitional provisions.

Can a tourist abroad bring an action in Türkiye?

If the tourist has returned to his or her country, the process can be followed through the appointment of an attorney, notarial/consular documents from abroad, translation and the submission of foreign documents. That the accident occurred in Türkiye does not alone prove that Turkish law will apply to every claim or that every court has jurisdiction. In tort, MÖHUK Article 34 and other relevant provisions; in contractual connections, MÖHUK Article 24 and mandatory protective rules are assessed according to the specific relationship. Continuing the treatment in a foreign country, a foreign income document and foreign heirs may give rise to additional evidentiary requirements.

MÖHUK Article 48: the foreign claimant’s obligation to provide security and the reciprocity exemption

For foreign natural and legal persons who bring a civil action, intervene in an action or start enforcement proceedings in Türkiye, Article 48 of Law No. 5718 (MÖHUK) brings into play security to be determined by the court for the costs of the proceedings or enforcement and for the other side’s possible losses. However, this obligation is not an unconditional payment that will apply in the same way to all foreign tourists. Under MÖHUK Article 48/2, the exemption based on reciprocity is assessed; applicable bilateral or multilateral treaties on legal aid/exemption from security to which Türkiye is a party must also be investigated separately. The court’s decision on security, its amount and any consequences of time limits must be clarified in the specific file.

In the examination of security, the tourist’s nationality, his or her state’s treaties with Türkiye, any multiple nationalities, the capacity in which he or she sues or intervenes and the nature of the claim must be established by documents. The possibility of security does not mean that a foreign person cannot bring an action in Türkiye or that he or she will definitely have to deposit security. Possible security should be shown separately in the litigation budget; this procedural matter must not be confused with the merits of compensation or the calculation of the loss.

Assessing liability in light of verified case law

Decision of the 11th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation of 05.09.2024

In its decision Court of Cassation 11th Civil Chamber (Yargıtay 11. Hukuk Dairesi), 05.09.2024, E.2023/3817, K.2024/6056, claims arising from a contract of passenger carriage for bodily harm, incapacity for work and accommodation/seminar expenses resulting from a bus accident were examined. In the specific file, the previously finalised material facts, fault and health reports were assessed; the defendant’s appeal objections were not found sufficient for reversal, and the decision of the regional court of appeal (bölge adliye mahkemesi) was upheld. The instructive aspect of the decision is that the passenger’s contractual interests and medical loss of working capacity and the additional expenses arising from the incident can be argued in the same loss calculation without double recovery in collection. This decision does not mean that the same head of loss will be accepted in the same amount in every transfer accident.

Reflection in practice

In building the accident file, it is necessary to present under separate headings not only the driver’s traffic fault but also the contract of carriage, the document on loss of earnings, additional travel expenses and prior collections. Which claim against the insurer, the operator and the carrier rests on which legal basis must be kept clear.

A roadmap of applications that can be followed after the incident

1. Ensure emergency treatment; record the date-and-time chain of the accident and the medical event.
2. Establish the contractual roles of the vehicle, driver, operator, carrier, and the tour/hotel/agency.
3. Collect the health, income, incapacity for work and expense documents in Türkiye and abroad.
4. Obtain the insurance policies and cover limits; assess the KTK Article 97 application in respect of the insurer concerned.
5. If necessary, plan separately the preservation of evidence, the application to the public prosecutor and steps to protect against limitation.
6. Set off any insurance payments already collected, and determine the competent court, the legal basis and the relief sought.

Table matching responsible persons and routes of application

The existence of more than one basis of liability does not mean that every counterparty is liable to the same extent for all heads of loss. Claims and set-off should be managed so that there is no double recovery for the same loss.

Conclusion

Whether a foreign tourist can effectively assert his or her rights arising from a transfer or tour bus accident depends on identifying the persons responsible in their correct legal capacities, showing the loss and the causal link with concrete evidence, obtaining and preserving evidence lawfully, and presenting it in the file in accordance with the relevant procedure. Different liability provisions apply to the driver’s fault, the vehicle operator, the carrier, the hotel, the travel agency and the insurer. The old provisions of Law No. 4925 should not be relied on; the current provisions of Laws No. 2918 and No. 6102, the package tour relationship, the actual policy and the foreign element must be examined together. The tourist’s returning to his or her country does not by itself bring the routes of seeking justice to an end.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can compensation be claimed for an accident on a free hotel shuttle?

Yes, depending on the circumstances of the incident. The fact that the service is free does not by itself remove the operator’s liability under the KTK; the hotel’s contractual liability is assessed according to the undertaking it gave and its organisational role.

Can a tour company still be liable if it does not own the vehicle?

Yes, particularly in a package tour or a promised transport service, contractual liability may come into play. However, it cannot be accepted that a person who merely brokered the sale is automatically liable in every incident.

If we have returned to our country after the accident, do we lose the right to sue?

No. By examining jurisdiction, the applicable law, power of attorney and evidence conditions, the routes of application in Türkiye can be used.

Can we bring an action without applying to the insurance company?

For claims within the limit of compulsory traffic insurance, a written prior application is mandatory under KTK Article 97. The same result does not follow automatically for other defendants and separate legal grounds.

Within how many days must the insurer respond to the application?

KTK Article 97 provides 15 days. If the insurer does not respond or the dispute continues, an action or, where its conditions are met, insurance arbitration may be considered.

Can a hospital in Türkiye charge a foreign tourist for treatment after a traffic accident?

Article 10/4 of the Regulation of 26.04.2025 provides that the cost of in-scope healthcare services resulting from a traffic accident will be collected from the SGK and cannot be demanded from the person himself or herself. The responsibility and financing of later treatment abroad are examined separately.

Can loss of salary abroad be claimed?

Yes, to the extent that legal and medical causation and the amount can be proven. The reliability of payroll, tax and employer records is important.

If a passenger did not wear a seat belt, is the right to compensation lost entirely?

No. A contributory fault allegation is assessed by examining the contribution of seat belt use to the specific injury and the other conditions; there is no automatic loss of right or fixed reduction.

Which court should the action be brought in?

Jurisdiction and venue are assessed after the claim’s character as carriage, traffic, consumer, tort or insurance law and the foreign element have been determined. A single type of court cannot be named for every file.

Is the limitation period two years in every case?

No. KTK Article 109 provides a two-year period from knowledge and a ten-year outer limit for certain claims for pecuniary damages. The legal basis of the claim, the criminal limitation period and other special rules must be checked separately.

Whom should one apply to in an accident involving an uninsured vehicle or one whose perpetrator cannot be found?

In the limited situations of bodily harm listed in Article 14 of the Insurance Law, an application to the Guarantee Account may be considered. This application is not an unlimited cover for all property damage or non-pecuniary losses; whether the incident falls within the Account’s risk scope must be investigated.

Does the new TBK Article 55 interest rule apply to a traffic accident before 31 July 2026?

No. Provisional Article 1/9 of Law No. 7589 limits the new interest and proportional set-off rules to loss-causing events after entry into force. For earlier events, the previous provision applies; that the action is filed later does not by itself change the result.

Can an action for an uncertain claim be filed after 2026?

HMK Article 107 was repealed as of 31 July 2026; in actions filed earlier, the former article is preserved under the transitional provision. In files to be newly opened, HMK Article 109/4 and other procedural possibilities should be assessed according to the relief sought and the specific conditions.

Does the disclaimer on the transfer ticket remove my right to compensation?

Clauses that exclude or reduce liability in advance are invalid under TTK Article 854 to the extent that the carriage is subject to the TTK provisions. A payment, release or settlement signed after the accident is examined separately in terms of date, content, will and KTK Article 111.

Is the limitation period in passenger transport only two years?

No. Depending on which legal ground and which type of loss is relied on, the ten-year/one-year regime of TTK Article 855, KTK Article 109 and other special provisions may produce different results. The date of the incident and the start of the period must be determined concretely.

Must a foreign tourist deposit security for a compensation action in Türkiye?

Where the conditions for the application of MÖHUK Article 48 exist, security may come into play; the exemption under reciprocity and applicable international agreements must be examined separately. Being a foreigner does not by itself mean that the action cannot be heard.

Sources and legal bases

1. Highway Traffic Law (Karayolları Trafik Kanunu) No. 2918, in particular Articles 85–86, 90, 97–99, 109–110. uab.gov.tr
2. Turkish Commercial Code (Türk Ticaret Kanunu) No. 6102, Articles 850, 914. ito.org.tr
3. Highway Transport Law (Karayolu Taşıma Kanunu) No. 4925; historical distinction concerning its Articles 17–25 repealed by Law No. 6704. lexpera.com.tr
4. Consumer Protection Law (Tüketicinin Korunması Hakkında Kanun) No. 6502, Article 51, and the Regulation on Package Tour Contracts, Ministry of Trade. ticaret.gov.tr
5. Official Gazette (Resmî Gazete) of 26.04.2025, No. 32882, Regulation on International Health Tourism and the Health of Tourists, Article 10. resmigazete.gov.tr
6. Court of Cassation 11th Civil Chamber, 05.09.2024, E.2023/3817, K.2024/6056, full text. app.dejure.ai
7. Turkish Code of Obligations (Türk Borçlar Kanunu) No. 6098, Articles 49, 52, 54, 56, 112, 116; Law No. 5718 on Private International and Procedural Law (MÖHUK), Articles 24, 34; Code of Civil Procedure (HMK) No. 6100, Article 400 and following.
8. Law No. 7589, Official Gazette of 31.07.2026, in particular Articles 18–20, Article 26 and provisional Article 1/9–10. resmigazete.gov.tr
9. Insurance Law (Sigortacılık Kanunu) No. 5684, Article 14 and the Guarantee Account, scope and conditions of application. guvencehesabi.org.tr
10. Insurance Arbitration Commission, application and insurer assessment periods. sigortatahkim.org.tr
11. Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100, foreign documents and certification conditions, Articles 223–224. mevzuat.adalet.gov.tr
12. Ministry of Trade, Information on Package Tour Contracts. tuketici.ticaret.gov.tr
13. Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102, in particular Articles 854–855 (prohibition of excluding liability in advance; limitation of carriage claims). ito.org.tr
14. Law No. 5718 on Private International and Procedural Law, Article 48 (security of a foreign claimant and reciprocity). mevzuat.adalet.gov.tr