Interim maintenance is a temporary or protective financial measure that secures living support for a spouse and a child who need it while the marriage continues. Article 169 of the Turkish Civil Code (TMK) sets out its conditions where a divorce case is pending, Article 197 applies where the spouses live apart without a divorce case, and Article 196 applies to contributions toward family expenses while the spouses still live together. For this reason, the idea that “maintenance cannot be obtained without filing for divorce” is not correct. [1]
The correct application is not limited to writing down the amount requested. Do the spouses still live together? Is there a divorce case? What is the reason for living apart? Who takes care of the child? Has a maintenance order already been made? These questions affect the legal basis, the start date and the collection route alike.
Which provision applies in which situation?
The law recognises that family financial problems do not arise in only one form. Not contributing to expenses while living together, living apart for justified reasons, and the need for living support during a divorce case each have different application routes. In files involving a risk of violence, Law No. 6284 is also assessed separately. [1, 2]
| Situation | Legal basis | Key feature |
|---|---|---|
| Not contributing to expenses while living together | TMK Article 196 | A monetary contribution is set at the request of one spouse |
| Living apart and need for living support | TMK Article 197 | Justified separation or other conditions under the law are examined |
| Pending divorce or separation case | TMK Article 169 | The court takes the necessary interim measures on its own initiative |
| Need for protection from violence | Law No. 6284, Article 5/4 | Any earlier maintenance order and special conditions are examined |
That these routes share common names in everyday use does not mean their conditions are the same. In particular, the assessment of justified separation under TMK Article 197 must not be confused with the provision of temporary support in a divorce file under TMK Article 169.
Interim maintenance during a divorce case
TMK Article 169 requires the court, once a divorce or separation case is filed, to take the necessary temporary measures concerning the spouses’ housing and living, the management of property, and the care and protection of the children. A spouse’s or child’s need for support is not held back until the final decision. These measures are not of the same nature as the final ruling on the financial consequences of the divorce. [1]
Can maintenance be awarded if no request was written?
The court’s ability to act on its own initiative does not make it unnecessary for the applicant to explain their needs. Rent, lack of income or insufficient income, child expenses and existing payments should be clearly stated. A concrete budget of living costs makes it easier for the temporary order to be set on the actual facts of the file.
It is useful to state separate amounts for the spouse and for each child. A description such as “total payment for the family” may leave unclear for whose needs the money is intended. The age, schooling and health needs of each child differ and should be kept in mind as well.
Can a spouse at fault receive maintenance in a divorce?
Interim maintenance is not an institution that punishes fault in advance. The condition in TMK Article 175, that a spouse claiming poverty maintenance must not be the more at-fault party, is not carried over word for word to Article 169. However, this does not mean that all the facts of the couple’s life and support are unimportant. Need, current income, support actually provided and exceptional living circumstances are assessed separately. [1, 3]
Case-law assessments of situations such as living with another person in a marriage-like relationship also cannot be dismissed with the sentence “fault is never important”. In the decision of the Civil General Assembly discussed below, a general divorce fault and such special circumstances are not treated as the same. A social media exchange cannot always be treated as conclusive proof of living together or of receiving support. [3]
Can maintenance be requested before filing for divorce?
Yes. Measures to protect the marital union can be requested without asking for the marriage to be ended. For this, the application must be founded on reasons that fit the facts under TMK Article 196 or 197. “I do not want a divorce yet” does not mean that the request for living support has been abandoned. [1]
If the spouses live in the same home
Under TMK Article 196, at the request of one spouse the court may set the monetary contribution that each spouse is to make toward the family’s living costs. Housework, caring for the children and unpaid work in the other spouse’s business are also taken into account when calculating the contribution. Living in the same home does not require one spouse to bear all the expenses alone. [1]
This provision allows a contribution to be requested for a past year as well as for future years. However, this special rule cannot be generalised to mean that every type of interim maintenance automatically collects the year before the case was filed. The provision on which the requested period rests must be stated.
If the spouses live apart
TMK Article 197 regulates the right to live apart where joint life would seriously endanger personal integrity, economic security or family peace. In a justified separation, a monetary contribution and measures such as the use of the home and household goods may be requested. The law also covers situations in which a spouse refuses to live together without justified cause, or in which joint life becomes impossible for another reason. [1]
For this reason, who left the home is not enough on its own. The reasons for the separation should be shown through any protection orders, medical records, witness statements and a chronology of events. Protective measures for the child are assessed separately. Disputes between the spouses should not hide the child’s need for support.
Which income and expenses are examined when setting the amount?
There is no fixed percentage of salary for interim maintenance. Income, housing conditions, earnings from property, health costs and care obligations are examined together. Unemployment matters, but merely stating that one is unemployed may not show that all ability to pay has disappeared. [1, 3]
That both spouses work does not require an automatic rejection of the claim. The amount and regularity of income, housing costs, the child’s actual care burden and living conditions are compared. Where the spouses’ economic strength is close, a different assessment may follow. The court’s result must rest on the concrete data in the file. On the situation of the parent who actually takes on the child’s care, and its effect on maintenance, the article What Happens to Maintenance When Custody Changes? may also be consulted.
| Matter to be proven | Information that can be submitted | Investigation the court may request |
|---|---|---|
| Regular income | Payslip, pension information, current bank statement | SGK, employer and relevant agency records |
| Housing need | Lease agreement, payment records | Housing and residence conditions |
| Child’s expenses | School, transport and health documents | Information from schools and health institutions |
| Other income sources | Known real estate or commercial activity | Land registry, tax, bank and company records |
| Reason for living apart | Chronology of events, lawful documents | Relevant files, witness and agency information |
Using someone else’s bank account or private communications without permission is not the proper way to gather evidence. It may be requested that the court obtain the relevant record, stating where it is held and what it is expected to show. Rather than many unrelated documents, a file should be prepared that is tied to the need and whose dates are clear.
How are the start and end dates determined?
In a divorce case, interim maintenance is as a rule aimed at protecting living support from the date of the case and while the proceedings continue. However, a need that arises later, a change in the existing payment or the specific content of an interim decision may affect how the start date is calculated. Even where the interim decision was issued late, it should not be assumed that the calculation begins only on the day of the decision. [1, 3]
The measure under TMK Article 169 depends on the divorce or separation case and, as a rule, continues until the decision becomes final. Where the claim is dismissed, the period between the date of the first decision and finality must also be separated out. If the need for support continues after finality, it is assessed whether another legal basis exists; an earlier interim decision does not turn into an indefinite maintenance ruling.
Where a protective decision is given independently under TMK Article 197, it cannot be tied to the finality date of a divorce case that has not been filed. Changed circumstances, or the disappearance of the reason for the measure, are subject to a request for variation or termination under TMK Article 200. The difference between these two regimes is particularly important when a payment schedule is prepared. [1]
Distinguishing fault and collection in Court of Cassation decisions
The 2018 decision of the Civil General Assembly
In the decision of the Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu, HGK) dated October 25, 2018, E.2017/2-1891, K.2018/1577, it is emphasised that interim maintenance cannot be subjected to the same assessment as a spouse’s fault in the divorce. The decision examines the balance between income and need. Treating the claim that the obligor has no income as the sole reason to remove maintenance entirely is not accepted. However, the decision does not say that the same amount must be imposed on every unemployed person without examining ability to pay. [3]
In the concrete case, the fault assessment concerning an online relationship was not equated with a finding that a joint life with another person had actually been established. This distinction of facts should be preserved when the decision is used. Otherwise, the balance between the purpose of temporary protection and the concrete inquiry into need would be lost.
The effect of an interim decision on enforcement
The decision of the 12th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 12. Hukuk Dairesi) dated March 13, 2019, E.2018/6085, K.2019/4240, states that an interim decision on maintenance is not an enforceable title (ilam) and may be pursued through general attachment proceedings. This distinction prevents the approach “there is a maintenance order, so enforcement is always by enforceable title”. Where a final judgment or another basis for enforcement exists, its nature is examined separately. [4] The related procedural steps are explained in the article Can a Maintenance Order Be Enforced Before It Becomes Final?
The historical appeal period stated at the end of the decision cannot be used for any current application. The type of enforcement, the notification and the current procedural provisions should be relied on instead. The fact that an interim decision is not suitable for enforcement by enforceable title does not mean that maintenance can never be collected at all.
How is maintenance assessed under Law No. 6284?
Where the person who uses violence is the one who provides, or contributes to, the family’s livelihood, the court may award interim maintenance under Article 5/4 of Law No. 6284 even without a request, provided that no maintenance has previously been awarded under the Turkish Civil Code. The living standard of the victim of violence is taken into account. A protective measure and living support can both matter within the same file. [2]
Article 18 of the Law provides for a copy of the maintenance order to be sent automatically to the relevant enforcement office and for collection from wages or earnings under certain conditions. This special procedure does not mean that all maintenance orders are collected in the same way. The existing maintenance order should be disclosed in the application, and no overlapping collection calculation should be created for the same need and period. [2]
The objection procedure under Law No. 6284 and the review of the interim decision under TMK Article 169 in a divorce file are separate. The two-week objection period set out for decisions under Law No. 6284 should not be applied under the same name to all other interim maintenance decisions. The law under which a decision was given is the first point of control. [2]
Changing the decision and the competent court
When income, health or housing conditions change, an appropriate application may be made by submitting documents on the change. In an ongoing divorce case, a re-evaluation of the interim decision is requested. For independent measures aimed at preserving the marital union, TMK Articles 200–201 are taken into account. Objecting or seeking a variation does not by itself stop the current payment. [1]
The family court is the competent court. Under TMK Article 201, for measures aimed at preserving the marital union, the court of the residence of either spouse has jurisdiction; the article contains separate provisions for two distinct applications and for changing the measure. A request within a divorce file is decided within that proceeding. The court’s duties, jurisdiction and form of application must be built on the legal basis chosen. [1, 5]
Conclusion
The most important step in interim maintenance is to tie the need for living support to the correct legal basis. Living together, living apart, divorce proceedings and protection from violence are not the same application. Documenting income and expenses, explaining the starting period and choosing a collection route suited to the nature of the decision are what allow protection to produce real results.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I obtain maintenance without filing for divorce?
If the conditions are met, you may request a contribution and a protective measure under TMK Article 196 or 197. The basis of the application depends on whether the spouses live together or apart. [1]
Is there maintenance between spouses who live in the same home?
TMK Article 196 allows the court to set the monetary contribution toward family expenses. Living in the same home does not close this route. [1]
Can a working spouse request interim maintenance?
Working alone is not an obstacle. Income, expenses and the economic strength of the parties are assessed together. [3]
Does serious fault in a divorce prevent interim maintenance?
The fault condition for poverty maintenance does not apply to interim maintenance as such. However, need and actual living conditions are assessed separately. [1, 3]
Can the court award maintenance without a request?
Within a divorce file, the court may take the necessary interim measures on its own initiative under TMK Article 169. The application procedure for independent requests under TMK Articles 196–197 is different. [1]
Is interim maintenance always claimed for the previous year?
No. The provision on a contribution for a past year is found in TMK Article 196. It does not apply automatically to all maintenance requests. [1]
If the divorce case is dismissed, does maintenance end immediately?
Under the interim measure of TMK Article 169, finality is taken into account as a rule. The date of the rejection and the date of finality may not be the same, so the content of the decision should be reviewed. [1, 3]
Can maintenance set by an interim decision be collected?
Yes. However, because of the nature of an interim decision, the distinction between general attachment proceedings and enforcement by enforceable title is important; enforcement by enforceable title is not possible in every case. [4]
If I object to maintenance, does payment stop?
An objection or a request for variation does not by itself end the payment obligation. The valid decision and any new court decision are applied. [1]
If there is a protection order, is maintenance also assessed?
Yes, if the conditions of Article 5/4 of Law No. 6284 are present. Any earlier maintenance order and payments for the same period must be disclosed. [2]
Sources and legal bases
- Turkish Civil Code No. 4721 (TMK), Articles 169, 175, 185–201.
- Law No. 6284 on the Protection of the Family and Prevention of Violence against Women, in particular Articles 5/4, 9 and 18.
- Court of Cassation Civil General Assembly (HGK), October 25, 2018, E.2017/2-1891, K.2018/1577. Secondary publication of the full text of the decision on Kazancı.
- Court of Cassation 12th Civil Chamber (Yargıtay 12. Hukuk Dairesi), March 13, 2019, E.2018/6085, K.2019/4240. Secondary publication of the full text of the decision on Avarsis.
- Law No. 4787 on Family Courts, Articles 2 and 4.