For a foreign seafarer injured on a commercial ship, or for the relatives of a crew member who has died, the first legal question is in which country and against whom a claim can be brought. The ship being in Türkiye, the employer being established in another country and a foreign law being chosen in the contract can all come together in the same file. The right to compensation is determined by examining together the law applicable to the employment relationship, the jurisdiction of the court, the causes of the accident and the insurance cover.
This article, separately from the general account of wage and termination claims, focuses on bodily injury and death on commercial ships. It sets out the basic order of assessment for foreign seafarers, their families, shipowners, employer companies, P&I clubs and the foreign law firms following the file in Türkiye.
Which persons and documents should be identified at the first stage?
The owner in the ship registry, the company operating the ship, the technical manager, the crew management company and the employer named in the employment contract may all be different persons. The role of any company that mediated the placement of the crew must also be determined separately. The company or agent named on the payroll may not, on its own, be the correct counterparty for every compensation claim.
The employment contract, any collective bargaining agreement, recruitment documents, wage transfers and joining records are the starting documents. It is also important during which task the accident occurred, who gave the order, who owned the equipment and who ran the safety organization. The shipowner's liability that may arise under maritime law and the employer's debt arising from the service relationship should not be reduced to the same ground.
A claim may also arise against a terminal, a loading company, an equipment manufacturer or another ship connected with the incident. A tort claim directed at such third parties may not be subject to the same law and jurisdiction analysis as the claim against the employer arising from the employment contract. Building a separate liability picture for each counterparty makes the file clearer.
Which employment law applies to a foreign seafarer?
In employment contracts with a foreign element, Article 27 of the Law on Private International and Procedural Law (MÖHUK) is the basic provision. The parties' choice of law is assessed subject to the minimum protection afforded by the mandatory provisions of the law of the employee's habitual place of work. Where there is no choice, connecting factors such as the habitual place of work, work performed in more than one country and the employer's principal place of business become important. [1]
Determining the habitual place of work requires particular care for maritime employees. The flag of the ship, the voyage pattern, the ports of joining and return, the center of the work organization, the place from which instructions are given and the conditions in which the contract is actually performed are examined together. It cannot be said that a single address in the contract, or the seafarer's nationality, offers a definitive solution in every case.
How does the 2025 amendment affect the assessment?
Paragraphs one and four of MÖHUK Article 27 were amended in 2025 by Article 18 of Law No. 7550. The current fourth paragraph provides that, where the contract is more closely connected with another law in light of all the circumstances, that law may be applied instead of paragraphs one, two and three. The mandatory provisions of the law of the place where the work is performed, applicable at the time the work is performed, are separately reserved. [2]
Because of this amendment, the approach found in an older opinion, that “where a choice of law exists, a closer connection can in no way be considered,” should not be carried over to the current text. Conversely, the employee being a Turkish citizen or the employer having a connection with Türkiye does not automatically make Turkish law applicable in every file. The transitional assessment, depending on the date of the event and of the contract, is made separately.
Does the Maritime Labour Act apply on every ship?
Article 1 of the Maritime Labour Act No. 854 (Deniz İş Kanunu) establishes a defined scope on the basis of the Turkish flag and the size of the ship. There are also additional scope rules concerning the total tonnage of ships belonging to the same employer or the number of seafarers employed. Saying that everyone working on a foreign-flagged ship is directly subject to Act No. 854 is not compatible with this provision. [3]
In an employment relationship for which Turkish law has been determined to apply but which falls outside the scope of the Maritime Labour Act, the service contract provisions of the Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK) may come into play. TBK Article 417, which regulates the employer's duty to protect the employee's personality and health, is important. This stage first requires determining the applicable law by reason of the foreign element. [4]
In which court can a case be filed in Türkiye?
International jurisdiction must be examined separately from subject-matter jurisdiction and territorial jurisdiction under domestic law. MÖHUK Article 44 provides special connecting factors for individual employment contracts and employment relationships. It is important that the employee's habitual place of work is in Türkiye; in the employee's claims against the employer, Turkish connections relating to the employer's domicile and the employee's domicile or habitual residence are also taken into account. MÖHUK Article 47/2 limits the exclusion of this protective jurisdiction by contract. [1]
In an accident at a Turkish port, the place of the incident and the special jurisdiction provisions of Turkish procedural law also enter the assessment. However, it cannot be said that, merely because a ship has briefly called at Türkiye, all employment disputes anywhere in the world can be resolved in a Turkish court. The basis of jurisdiction must be shown separately for claims directed at the insurer or at third parties.
Article 5 of the Labor Courts Law No. 7036 places within the jurisdiction of the labor courts certain disputes between employees and employers subject to the service contract provisions of the Turkish Code of Obligations, in addition to seafarers subject to Act No. 854. The assumption that every maritime accident case will be heard by the commercial court that handles maritime specialization is therefore incorrect. [5]
Is mediation mandatory in workplace accident compensation?
Article 3/3 of Law No. 7036 excludes from the mediation-as-a-condition-of-suit rule of the same article the determination, objection and recourse cases relating to pecuniary and non-pecuniary compensation arising from a workplace accident or occupational disease. By contrast, the assertion of wage, termination and other claims in the same file must be assessed separately. [5]
This exception produces no automatic result for an independent insurance claim or another commercial dispute. The defendant's capacity, the legal ground, the competent court and any other applicable conditions of suit must be checked separately. Misclassifying the route of application can enlarge problems of time limits and service of process, particularly in a file with foreign parties.
What losses can be claimed in case of injury and death?
If Turkish law applies, TBK Article 54 is the starting point for bodily injury, for heads such as treatment expenses, loss of earnings, reduction or loss of working capacity and impairment of economic future. In the event of death, funeral expenses under TBK Article 53, the relevant treatment costs and loss of earnings if death did not occur immediately, and loss of support are assessed. For non-pecuniary damages, the conditions of TBK Article 56 are examined. [4]
In an event to which foreign law applies, the heads of loss, the method of calculation, the liability standard and contractual payments may differ. A Turkish compensation calculation should therefore not be equated directly with a fixed death or disability payment in a foreign collective bargaining agreement. The effect of one payment on another claim is determined within the framework of the relevant law and contract.
| Area of claim | Basic information needed | Frequently encountered problem |
|---|---|---|
| Treatment and care | Report, invoice, care needs | Adding expenses unrelated to the accident |
| Temporary loss of earnings | Period of inability to work, actual income | Confusing gross and net wages |
| Permanent loss of working capacity | Appropriate specialist report, occupational information | Failing to separate the medical finding from the occupational impact |
| Loss of support | Actual support relationship, income, beneficiaries | Treating heirship and a support relationship as equivalent |
| Contractual payment | Employment and collective bargaining agreement | Assuming the payment closes all rights |
A claim for loss of support may not be explained by a certificate of inheritance alone. It is determined who actually received support, how the support continued and how the death affected that relationship. The use of foreign family documents, authority of representation and, where necessary, translation or authentication steps must also be planned separately.
Psychological effects after the accident can likewise be documented by an appropriate medical assessment. However, for a narrative to become a legally acceptable assessment of loss and causation, a specialist report, incident records and the effect on working life are considered together. It is not assumed that every serious incident will produce the same compensation outcome.
How are fault and the safety organization examined?
Focusing only on the final movement that caused the accident may not be sufficient. The risk assessment of the work, training, personal protective equipment, rest periods, shift arrangements, permit-to-work system, equipment maintenance and emergency assistance organization are examined together. For tasks such as entering an enclosed space, working at height, rope operations or crane use, specific records become important.
The employer's organizational fault, the actions of other employees, equipment failure and the seafarer's own conduct may all play a part in the same incident. Within the framework of the applicable law, the effect of these causes on compensation is determined. That an internal investigation report holds only the employee responsible does not remove the court's duty to evaluate all the evidence.
Access to medical care and appropriate evacuation are also part of the examination. Records of first medical aid, ship's doctor or remote medical support, the time of landing ashore and the time of hospital admission should be preserved. While health and safety measures continue, evidence should be collected in a manner suited to the injured person's condition and to the protection of their personal data.
What do MLC 2006 and P&I cover provide?
MLC 2006 is important, on the ships and in the legal systems where it can be applied, for medical care, the shipowner's liability and certain financial security obligations. There are provisions securing contractual compensation for injury, illness or death resulting from work-related risk, or for long-term disability. Under Standards A4.2.1 and A4.2.2, once the conditions are met, the seafarer or the relevant beneficiaries may apply to the security provider. [6]
Enacting a ratification law in Türkiye and registering the international ratification with the ILO are not the same stage. The ILO NORMLEX record accessed on the date of review lists MLC 2006 among the conventions that Türkiye has not yet ratified. The MLC provisions should therefore not be presented as though Türkiye were a party to the convention in every case. The MLC system may nonetheless remain important because of the law of the foreign flag state, the employment contract and an issued financial security certificate. [7]
The contractual payment under MLC security does not fix a single death or disability amount valid in every country. The relevant contract, the collective bargaining agreement and national regulations are examined. The relationship between the payment made and the losses that may separately be claimed, and any set-off, must be assessed. Signing a comprehensive release in a language the beneficiary does not understand is not a suitable method of resolving the file.
On the P&I side, Gard Rule 27 is an example of a club rule dealing with certain costs and liabilities arising from injury, illness and death of crew. For additional liabilities assumed only by contract, approval conditions may be important. Not every club and policy provides the same cover. The certificate of entry, the special terms and, where there is one, the MLC financial security certificate must be read together. [8]
Evidence, social security and coordination with the foreign file
The first versions of incident records should be preserved. The ship's logbook, duty and rest schedules, work permits, equipment maintenance records, witness communications, camera footage and, to the extent appropriate, voyage records are filed. Because witnesses may leave the ship and digital records may be deleted, the need for preservation of evidence is assessed early.
Which social security system the foreign seafarer is subject to is also investigated separately. Receiving treatment in Türkiye alone does not show that the seafarer will benefit from all the benefits under Law No. 5510. The insured status, applicable social security agreements, employer records and notification of the incident matter. The effect of social security payments or private insurance payments on compensation should not be treated as an automatic and blanket deduction.
It should be explained which question the report from the foreign law firm and the medical and legal report in Türkiye each answer. “Permanent disability,” “inability to practice one’s profession” and the definition of “disability” in a particular contract may rest on different criteria. The currency, the period of employment, income documents and the list of beneficiaries should be kept in a common file schedule.
In settlement negotiations, the type of payment, the period covered, the beneficiaries, authority of representation, translation and the scope of the release should be stated clearly. Whether an interim assistance payment ends all claims should not be left to assumption. How notice, suit and other time limits will be protected during the negotiations is also assessed separately.
Where Turkish law applies, in contractual liability against the employer under TBK Article 417, the assessment of the general ten-year statute of limitations in TBK Article 146 is important. The starting point is determined by taking into account when the claim falls due, the development of the loss and the relevant case law. For a tort claim against a third party, the two-year period running from knowledge and the ten-year period running from the act in TBK Article 72, as well as the possibility of a longer criminal limitation period, are examined separately. These are not common periods for every claim that is subject to foreign law or to special maritime law provisions. [4]
Case review: the competent court for a foreign-flagged ship
In the decision of the Istanbul 17th Commercial Court of First Instance dated May 24, 2022, E. 2021/194, K. 2022/312, claims for pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss connected with a pirate attack, brought by a seafarer working on a foreign-flagged ship, were examined. Taking the service relationship between the parties and Law No. 7036 as its basis, the court held that the labor courts have jurisdiction. [9]
This is not a decision that fixes the amount of compensation or the insurer’s payment obligation. It is a first-instance decision declining jurisdiction; whether it has become final has not been verified. Moreover, the decision’s assessment concerning the foreign flag and the Turkish Code of Obligations should not be generalized to mean that Turkish law will automatically apply on every foreign-flagged ship. The current MÖHUK analysis must be carried out independently.
Example file: a foreign seafarer injured at a terminal
Hypothetically, consider that a crew member of a foreign-flagged ship is injured during a rope operation at a terminal in Türkiye. The employer’s occupational safety obligation, the terminal’s equipment and organization, the instructions applied and the seafarer’s duty are examined separately. The legal and jurisdictional bases of the employment contract claim and of the claim directed at the terminal are compared. The medical aid expenses, the period of inability to work and the permanent effects are calculated with different documents. Recourse to P&I or other cover is pursued in parallel with this examination.
Conclusion
The injury or death of a foreign seafarer cannot be resolved by looking only at the ship’s flag. The correct identification of the employer, the current provisions of MÖHUK, the competent court, the medical evidence and the insurance cover must be assessed together. While treatment and support needs are being met, preserving evidence and informing the beneficiaries enable a cross-border file to be run soundly.
Related articles: Marine pollution and compensation; Removal of ship wrecks; Damage to ports, piers and terminals; Employment rights of yacht captains and crew; Marine accident claims under P&I insurance.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a foreign seafarer bring a compensation case in Türkiye?
Yes, if the conditions are met. The international jurisdiction of the Turkish courts, the competent court, the position of the defendant and the applicable law are each assessed separately. Foreign citizenship is not an obstacle on its own.
Does foreign law always apply on a foreign-flagged ship?
No. The flag is an important connecting factor; but elements such as the employment contract, the habitual place of work and the more closely connected law are examined together under MÖHUK.
Is it necessary to go to a mediator first for workplace accident compensation?
The exception for workplace accident and occupational disease compensation in Law No. 7036 is taken into account. For other heads such as wages or an independent insurance claim, the assessment may differ.
Can Türkiye be regarded as a party to MLC 2006?
On the date of review, ILO NORMLEX lists the convention among those that Türkiye has not ratified. The domestic-law approval act and the registration of the international ratification should not be confused.
Can only the heirs claim death compensation?
It depends on the type of claim. In Turkish law, the actual support relationship is important for loss of support. Contractual death payments and rights passing by inheritance are examined separately.
Does a P&I club’s payment of treatment costs close the whole file?
It depends on the scope of the payment. Treatment costs, contractual payments and other heads of compensation must be separated; any release and set-off provisions must be assessed.
Sources and legal bases
1 — Law No. 5718 on Private International and Procedural Law (MÖHUK), in particular Articles 27, 44 and 47; UYAP legislation record.
2 — Law No. 7550, Article 18, 2025 amendment.
3 — Maritime Labour Act No. 854, in particular Article 1.
4 — Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098, text as adopted by the Grand National Assembly, in particular Articles 53, 54, 56, 393 and 417.
5 — Labor Courts Law No. 7036, Grand National Assembly text, in particular Articles 3/3, 5 and 6.
6 — ILO, Guidelines for port State control officers carrying out inspections under MLC 2006, financial security and the explanations on A4.2.1–A4.2.2.
7 — ILO NORMLEX, Conventions not ratified by Türkiye (current), MLC 2006 record; accessed October 14, 2026.
8 — Gard, Rule 27: Liabilities in respect of crew. An example of specific club rules.
9 — Istanbul 17th Commercial Court of First Instance, May 24, 2022, E. 2021/194, K. 2022/312; decision record. The full text was reviewed; the decision concerns jurisdiction.
Date of access to sources and review of legislation: October 14, 2026. Before publication, a check should be made for amendments and for applicability to the specific case.