Compensation in a fatal traffic accident is not only a payment made to the heirs. Persons who lose the support provided by the deceased may claim compensation for loss of support for their own pecuniary damage, and the close relatives may claim non-pecuniary damages where the conditions are met. Funeral expenses and certain losses arising before death are also assessed separately. Who may assert which claim depends on the support relationship, on liability for the accident and on the scope of the insurance to which the claim is directed.
This guide explains, for traffic accidents in Türkiye, entitlement, the calculation of compensation, the evidence and the routes for making a claim. In particular, the right as heir and the right to compensation for loss of support must be kept separate; income, fault, earlier payments and time limits must be examined for each claimant. The date of the accident, of the policy and of the action may lead to different provisions applying.
Which compensation may be claimed in a fatal traffic accident?
Article 53 of the Turkish Code of Obligations regulates pecuniary damage arising from death, while Article 56 regulates the right of close relatives to non-pecuniary damages. The fact that these heads of claim arise from the same event does not mean that all of them belong to the same person or are owed by the same debtor. [1]
| Claim | Basis of the right | Point to be separated in the file |
|---|---|---|
| Loss of support | Loss of the deceased's financial or service-based support | The share, duration and loss of each person receiving support |
| Funeral and burial costs | Necessary and reasonable expenses incurred because of the death | The person who paid, the type and amount of the expense |
| Losses before death | Losses arising before death, such as treatment costs, loss of earnings and loss of working capacity | To whom the claim belongs, its passing to the estate, and its scope under social security |
| Non-pecuniary damages | Non-pecuniary harm suffered by close relatives because of the death | Closeness of the relationship, gravity of the event and the person against whom the claim is directed |
For example, a brother may have paid the funeral costs while the spouse and children lost regular support. The brother's claim for expenses and the loss of support suffered by the spouse and children are not the same calculation. Writing the claims as a single "family compensation" makes it unclear which amount is claimed for whom.
The difference between being an heir and the right to compensation for loss of support
Compensation is not divided according to inheritance shares
The right to compensation for loss of support is not a claim passing from the deceased by way of inheritance. It arises in the person of the one who loses the support upon the death. A person who is not an heir may therefore be entitled because of the support relationship, while the fact that a person is an heir does not, merely by presenting a certificate of inheritance, satisfy all the conditions of the claim. Renunciation of the inheritance does not, on its own, remove this independent right. The unification of case law decision expressly addresses this character of the right. [4]
The share of the estate and the share of support are not determined for the same purpose. The share of the estate concerns the distribution of the estate; the share of support shows the part of the deceased's income or labor from which the person would benefit. If the support of one child ends while another child's education continues, two children with the same inheritance share may receive different compensation amounts.
This distinction has long been accepted in legal scholarship. Gürsoy's study emphasizes that the claimant seeks the economic value of the assistance lost, not a claim of the decedent. The historical explanation here must not be substituted for current insurance exceptions and procedural provisions. [12]
The decedent's own claims and the claims of relatives must be distinguished
If the person lived for a period after the accident, the passing to the estate of the property claims arising during that period is examined separately. By contrast, the loss of support suffered by relatives is their own right directly. As regards the passing to the estate of the decedent's claim for non-pecuniary damages, the special condition in Article 25 of the Turkish Civil Code, namely that the decedent must have asserted the claim, must not be overlooked. The relatives' own right to non-pecuniary damages is different from this. [1, 13]
An agreement made by one relative does not terminate the claims of other rights holders unless the relative had authority to do so. When acting for a child, legal representation, special authority and any conflict between the representative and the child's interests are separately assessed. For this reason, insurance payment records are examined not only for the total amount but also for the person and the category of loss for which the payment was made.
Under which conditions are the spouse, children, mother and father entitled?
The claim of the surviving spouse
Support between spouses does not consist only of transferring a wage to the family budget. Housework, child care and services that sustain daily life also have economic value. That the surviving spouse works does not show that he or she received no support from the deceased spouse. The question to be examined is which contribution was lost from the shared domestic arrangements before death. [4]
Income records, shared expenses, bank movements and witnesses who know the household arrangements help to explain this contribution. The other side may argue that the parties had lived apart for a long time, or that the support alleged did not in fact exist. The marriage record and the real life facts are assessed together. For a divorced spouse, what matters is not merely the earlier marriage but an ongoing maintenance relationship or a concrete support relationship.
Remarriage may affect the duration of support and the calculation. An actual marriage date and the possibility of a future marriage are not the same data. If a reduction based on probability is to be applied, the method used and the concrete circumstances must be shown in the report; applying the same percentage reduction to every spouse without reasons is not acceptable.
The claims of children and the duration of support
The child's age, education, working status and any need for special care affect the duration of support. It is not correct to fix an automatic final age in every file merely by looking at the civil registry. A child still studying at university, an adult child who supports himself or herself, and a child with a continuing need for care cannot be calculated on the same assumption.
A student certificate, educational history, the expected time of entry into the profession and, where they exist, disability and care documents must be submitted to the file. Age thresholds for monthly pension entitlement under social security legislation do not automatically transfer to the private-law compensation calculation. Because the probable life expectancy of the supporter is also taken into account, a long-term need for care alone does not create an unlimited period of compensation. [4]
Does the parents' having income prevent the claim?
The Grand General Assembly for Unification of Case Law of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay İçtihatları Birleştirme Büyük Genel Kurulu), decision of June 22, 2018, E.2016/5, K.2018/6, does not make the parents' claim for loss of support conditional on the grant of an income from the SGK. The decision adopts the presumption that children support their parents. [4]
For this reason, the fact that the mother or father is retired, works or owns property cannot alone be a ground for rejection. Support is not merely a payment that rescues a person from poverty; it may also appear as a contribution to living standards and in the form of services. However, the presumption does not mean that a particular amount is paid automatically in every case. The period of support, income, shares, fault and insurance coverage are examined separately, and concrete facts to the contrary may be argued.
The dissenting opinions in the decision also include objections calling for the concrete establishment of actual support and need. These views, however, cannot be confused with the accepted outcome of the unification decision. Documenting the existing assistance and services in the application file reduces disputes over calculation, notwithstanding the presumption.
Siblings, fiancés and other persons who receive factual support
Entitlement is not confined to a closed list of relatives. A person living together without a formal marriage, a sibling or another person may make a claim if he or she demonstrates a real and continuing support relationship, or future support based on strong facts. Mere emotional closeness or occasional gifts are not sufficient. [4, 12]
Payment of rent and education costs, regular remittances, shared housing expenses and care services may show a support relationship. It must be explained whether the payments were repayments of a debt or contributions to subsistence. Engagement alone does not prove that all future expenses would have been met; concrete data, such as the nature of the relationship and preparations for a shared life, are required.
How is compensation for loss of support calculated?
Income, duration of support and periods
The calculation is not a transfer to the relatives of all the deceased's hypothetical earnings. First, the documentable net income, the person's own consumption and the persons supported by him or her are determined. Then the past and future periods, the working period and the following period, and the support duration of each rights holder, are assessed separately.
Wage slips, bank records, tax documents, professional chamber information and comparable earnings research are all significant. Where non-payroll earnings are alleged, their regularity and net amount must be proved. The turnover of a business is not the net personal income of its owner. The absence of an income document does not automatically mean that there was no loss of support; the applicable wage standard and the service support are investigated. [4, 7]
In calculating the future period, the life table, the income assumption, the working period, the method of increase and discount must be stated clearly. A total figure produced by a calculation program is not sufficient. It must be possible to verify which legal period was applied, the date on which each person left the support calculation, and how subsequent shares change.
Why do support shares change over time?
The distribution methods used in practice are not the fixed shares of the Civil Code. The deceased's own consumption, the spouse and children, the parents and other supported persons are assessed within the same family structure. Counting only the persons who bring the action may result in a higher share being allocated as if the other supported persons did not exist.
In a hypothetical example, suppose that for a given period two shares are allotted to the deceased's support, two shares to the spouse, and one share to each of two children. Within the total of six shares, the spouse's proportion is 2/6 and each child's proportion is 1/6. When one child ceases to be supported, the next period is recalculated. If a parent is also a rights holder, that may change the initial distribution. This example is not a method of calculation or a compensation result; it illustrates the effect of a change of period.
An objection to an expert report must not be made merely by saying that "the amount is low." Omitted income documents, an incorrect date of birth, an unjustified end of support, a missing rights holder, a duplicated fault reduction or an incorrect deduction of payments must be shown concretely. Otherwise, a wrong assumption may remain inside a table that appears mathematically correct.
The death of a child, a pensioner or a person without regular income
The future support of a child who is not yet working
That a child earned no income on the date of the accident does not mean that the parents lost no future support. The support presumption in the unification decision and the ordinary course of life are assessed. However, future earnings, the starting time and the share of support cannot be accepted as high without basis. [4]
The child's age, educational position, health conditions, the family's characteristics and the parents' probable life expectancy are significant. The calculation also takes account of the resources the child would have devoted to building his or her own life and to supporting the family. Where a deduction is argued on account of upbringing costs, it must be explained for which period, which expense item and on which legal basis it rests; an automatic percentage is not a sufficient justification.
The support of a pensioner and of a person working at home
Retirement is not the date on which the capacity to provide support ends. The contribution to the family from a pension, the continuing work and daily services may be examined as different facts. However, the same contribution must not be calculated twice under both a money item and a service item. The effect of social security payments awarded after death is also addressed separately.
The domestic labor of a person without paid work, such as caring for a child or a sick person, also has economic value. In such a case, the inquiry is directed to the content and value of the lost service, rather than assuming a salary that does not exist. Old age, unemployment or the absence of a payslip does not, on its own, produce a zero compensation result; the support actually lost must be shown. [4]
Distinguishing income from inherited property and lost personal labor
If the deceased owned a field, a leased property or a business, it cannot be assumed that all income ceased with the death. While the income from inherited property continues, the deceased's personal labor may have ended. Separating these two elements prevents both an incomplete and an excessive calculation.
In its decision of October 15, 2025, E.2024/532, K.2025/14162, the 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 4. Hukuk Dairesi) addressed the death of a supporter who was a farmer. The earlier reversal reasoning in the decision text emphasizes that, because agricultural production can continue, the value of the labor that would replace the deceased's personal contribution should be investigated, rather than treating all land income as lost. The 2025 decision affirms a judgment given in compliance with the earlier reversal. [7]
It does not follow from this that the entire value of the inherited estate is deducted from compensation. The question is which economic contribution the death has in fact eliminated. Business records, the mode of production and the work performed by the deceased must therefore be explained in the file.
Fault, single-vehicle accidents and insurance coverage
The fault of the deceased and the fault of the claimant are different
The accident report, the findings in the criminal file and the expert reports in civil proceedings are assessed together. The ratio in the report is not a fixed result in every dispute. Camera footage, witnesses, road conditions and vehicle examination may require a different assessment. A criminal court's assessment of fault also does not create an automatic compensation calculation that binds the civil judge in every respect. [1]
The deceased's contribution to the occurrence of the damage and the fault of the relative making the claim are examined separately. For example, where in the incident the deceased was a passenger and the relative was the driver or operator, a different legal issue arises from the mere fact of kinship. For insurance purposes, the exceptions in Article 92 of the Road Traffic Law (KTK) also apply separately. The current Article 92(j) excludes from coverage the part of the loss-of-support compensation corresponding to the fault of the supporting person; for older files, the law applicable in time must be investigated. [2, 3]
The General Conditions incorporating the amendments of June 12, 2026 enter into force on July 1, 2026. Because of the contract-date rule in Section C.11, the new text cannot be applied to all policies merely by looking at the date of the decision. The relationship of the general conditions to the law and to applicable court decisions must also be observed. [3]
Contrary decisions on the relatives of a wholly at-fault driver
Decisions on older accidents do not point in one direction. In its decision of February 5, 2024, E.2023/13594, K.2024/1061, the 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, the rejection of the claim made by the parents against their own vehicle insurance following the death of the wholly at-fault driver/operator in an accident of August 5, 2010 was upheld by majority. The dissent argued for the approach of independent third-party damage under the earlier regime. [5]
By contrast, in its decision of March 10, 2025, E.2023/7323, K.2025/4022, the same Chamber, a rejection decision concerning the parents of a wholly at-fault driver in an accident of June 15, 2012 was reversed by majority. The majority assessed the matter by reference to the law at the date of the accident and the independent right of those who lost support. The dissent defended the rejection of a claim based on the insured's own fault. [6]
These two decisions also do not support the conclusion that "payment is always made in accidents of the past." The year in which a decision was given is not the same as the law applicable to the accident. The status of the parties as driver, operator and person supported, the dates of the accident and the policy, the applicable statute and the general conditions must be examined together. A 2025 decision about a 2012 accident cannot be presented as a direct guarantee of payment for an accident in 2026.
Where the relative is also the at-fault driver or operator
In its decision of October 21, 2024, E.2022/12513, K.2024/9982, the 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, in an accident in which a passenger child died, the father was the wholly at-fault driver and the mother was the owner/operator of the vehicle. The affirmance of the rejection of the claim rested not merely on the parents' being heirs, but on their own legal position in the concrete case and the relationship of liability. [8]
Accordingly, this decision cannot be read as meaning that relatives of every person killed in the same vehicle are unable to obtain compensation. Short summaries of decisions used without indicating the role of the claimant in the accident may be misleading. The independence of the right to support does not remove all insurance exceptions.
How do SGK payments and earlier insurance payments enter the calculation?
Not every SGK payment is deducted from compensation
Article 55 of the Turkish Code of Obligations provides that social security payments which cannot be recovered by recourse, and payments that do not aim to perform the obligation to compensate, shall not be deducted from the calculation of damage. For this reason, receipt of a death pension or income from the Social Security Institution (SGK) does not automatically end the right to compensation for loss of support. The fact that no income has been granted to the parents is also not, in itself, a ground for rejection. [1, 4]
A "death pension" and "death income" payable on account of a work accident must not be treated as subject to the same legal regime. The type of payment from the institution, the branch of insurance on which it rests, the possibility of recourse and the relevant amounts must be asked for. It is not correct to remove all SGK payments in bulk without identifying the deductible part for the same person and the same loss. Donations and solidarity aid cannot be treated as insurance payments merely because money was received.
Partial payment, release and the 2026 amendment
A payment made by the insurer does not always show that the whole debt has been extinguished. The receipt, the actuarial report, the distribution by person and the scope of any signed document must be examined together. Article 111 of the KTK provides for annulment, within two years, of compensation agreements that are manifestly insufficient or excessive. However, not every release, settlement, mediation agreement or final judgment can be neutralized by this same rule. [2]
Article 55 of the Turkish Code of Obligations, as amended by Law No. 7589, provides that a payment made with a view to performing the obligation before the investigation begins shall be set off against the compensation determined as at the date of payment. The transitional provision ties the new rule to harmful events occurring after its entry into force. For this reason, the new set-off method must not be applied automatically to events occurring before July 31, 2026. [9]
The identity of the rights holder to whom a payment belongs remains important. A payment made to a spouse may not be deducted from a child's independent claim without explanation and legal basis. The same loss may not be collected twice. A calculation report must show the date, purpose, recipient of each payment and the set-off method applied.
Funeral costs and the non-pecuniary damages of relatives
Funeral, burial and pre-death expenses
Reasonable expenses for the transport of the body, burial and necessary procedures may be assessed under Article 53 of the Turkish Code of Obligations. The person who paid the expenses must show their connection with the death and their amount. Municipal records, transport invoices and payment documents are important. It cannot be assumed that every ceremonial expense will be compensated without limit; local conditions, reasonableness and proof are examined together. [1]
Where death occurred in hospital at a later date, the medical link between the accident and the death must be separately shown. The treatment file, the epicrisis, the death certificate and, where necessary, an expert report explain this connection. For treatment costs, the special regime of Article 98 KTK regarding SGK is observed; not all expenses are charged directly to the motor insurer. Pre-death losses and the loss of support after death must not be calculated twice under the same heading. [2]
Is material support a condition for non-pecuniary damages?
No. The non-pecuniary damages of relatives under Article 56 of the Turkish Code of Obligations are different from economic loss of support. The absence of a claim for loss of support does not remove the right to non-pecuniary damages where the conditions of kinship and non-pecuniary harm are met. The real closeness of the relationship, beyond the degree of kinship, and the effect of the event on the person are also important. [1]
Non-pecuniary damages are not calculated by an actuarial formula. The gravity of the event, fault, the circumstances of the parties and equity are assessed. The law provides no fixed sum in advance for all spouses, children or parents. The amount sought and its grounds must be explained for each relative.
Compulsory traffic insurance does not cover non-pecuniary damages. The claim is directed at persons who are legally liable; where voluntary financial liability insurance or another policy covers non-pecuniary loss, that is examined separately. The existence of a policy does not in itself guarantee non-pecuniary damages. [2, 3]
Application to the insurer, litigation and collection of compensation
To whom is the application made and which documents are prepared?
The responsibility of the at-fault driver, of the operator and, where the conditions exist, of the affiliated undertaking must be distinguished from the coverage liability of the insurer. The owner recorded on the registration document is important, but the operating relationship may differ according to the concrete circumstances. Where the vehicle was uninsured or cannot be identified, the conditions of the Guarantee Account (Güvence Hesabı) are examined for losses caused by death. The Account is not a general fund that pays every loss and non-pecuniary damages. [2, 11]
The following groups of documents should complement each other in the application file:
- The accident report, investigation information, camera and witness records if any; the death certificate and, if death occurred later, the treatment file.
- Civil registry and family records; information about the spouse, children and parents; for other supported persons, documents of shared life and regular assistance.
- Income and professional records, student certificates, records of need for care; the type of SGK payment and information about recourse.
- Policy information, earlier applications, proof of delivery, payment and release documents; a claim statement for each person and the representation papers.
Under Article 97 of the KTK, a preliminary written application is made to the insurer. If no written reply is given within 15 days or if the dispute continues, the route of litigation or insurance arbitration is opened. The 15-day period for traffic insurance must not be confused with the 15 business days used in some other insurance disputes. The eight-business-day payment period that depends on the transmission of the required documents is a separate provision. [2, 10]
The date on which the application reached the insurer and the enclosures sent must be kept. Documents should be sent through secure channels and limited to the necessary scope. Where an application by one family member does not expressly include the claims of all the other persons, it must not be assumed that an application was made on behalf of everyone.
Arbitration, the competent court and the amount of the claim
The Insurance Arbitration Commission (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu) examines insurance disputes; it is not a general court that resolves all personal liability of the driver and operator. In monetary claims of a commercial nature against an insurer, the condition of mediation as a precondition to litigation is separately assessed. A written application to the insurer does not replace mediation. Simultaneous referral of the same dispute to a court and to arbitration raises procedural problems. [10, 14]
The competent court is determined by the defendants and by the nature of the legal relationship. For claims directed against the insurer, the commercial court of first instance is relevant; for general tort claims directed only at the driver and operator, the civil court of first instance is relevant. Special relationships, such as occupational accidents or a contract of carriage, may change the result. The special venue options in Article 110 KTK are examined together with the general venue rules. [2, 14]
Law No. 7589 repealed Article 107 of the Code of Civil Procedure (HMK) and added to Article 109 of the HMK a provision allowing, in partial actions, a single increase of the claim until the end of the investigation phase, and interruption of limitation as regards the increased part from the date of the action. Actions brought before the repeal continue to be governed by the former Article 107. When preparing a new action, the old template for "action for an indeterminate claim" must not be used without reviewing this transition. [9]
Insurance limit, interest and collection
The death coverage does not mean that a full policy limit is granted separately to each heir. The General Conditions define death coverage per deceased person. The claims of multiple supported persons and the total limit per accident are assessed together; proportional distribution under Article 96 KTK may arise. The insurance limit is not necessarily the upper limit of the total compensation debt of the persons responsible. [2, 3]
Under the new Article 55 of the Turkish Code of Obligations, for loss of support in the amount relating to a known earnings period, statutory interest runs from the date of the event, and for the amount relating to an unknown earnings period, from the date of the decision. The transition depends on the date of the event. The default of the insurer, the claim item and the position of the other debtors are examined separately; it is not correct to write the same interest start date for all defendants and all items. [9]
While proceedings continue, an interim payment may be requested where the conditions of Article 76 TBK are met; credible evidence showing the merits of the request and the economic need are set out. This is not an automatic insurance advance. The costs of fees, expert's fees and the risk of attorney fees must also be calculated. After a decision, payment or enforcement proceedings, the appeal and any decisions to suspend enforcement are monitored together; an award of compensation alone does not provide a practical guarantee of collection. [1]
Limitation and the effect of the criminal file
Article 109 KTK provides, for pecuniary damages, a two-year period running from the date the damage and the liable person became known, and a ten-year period running from the day of the accident. Where the act constitutes a crime and the criminal law provides a longer limitation period, the extended period may apply. A single period must not be applied to all fatal accidents without examining the nature of the offence, the date of the event and the grounds for learning and interruption. For non-pecuniary damages, Article 72 TBK is also considered. [1, 2]
The continuation of a criminal file does not mean that all civil-law time limits are automatically suspended. Nor should it be assumed that an ordinary application or discussion with the insurer interrupts limitation in every case. The time calculation must be made for each rights holder, claim and addressee, and the necessary lawsuit or arbitration step must not be postponed.
A criminal investigation provides important documents on how the accident occurred and its connection with the death. However, the calculation of damage and of support in the civil action is carried out separately. A declaration of withdrawal of a complaint and a release from a compensation claim or withdrawal from an action are not the same act. The real scope of any signed document, and any special consequences of an amicable settlement or compromise, must be examined. [1, 2]
Conclusion
In a fatal traffic accident, a correct claim is built first by identifying separately the rights holder, the head of loss and the person responsible. Compensation for loss of support is not a division of inheritance; the lack of an income document does not mean there was no support; and an SGK or insurance payment does not produce the same result in every file.
For a sound assessment, the family and support table, evidence of income and services, fault documents, and the policy and payment records must be considered together. The assumptions of the calculation must be explained; in particular, contrary decisions on older accidents and the transitional provisions of 2026 must be matched with the dates of the file. In this way, it becomes possible to verify for which person, for which period and on which legal basis the claim is made.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a person who has renounced the inheritance claim compensation for loss of support?
Yes, if the other conditions are met. Because this right is not a claim passing by way of inheritance, renunciation of the inheritance does not in itself stand in the way. The support relationship and liability are examined separately. [4]
Does a mother or father receiving a pension prevent compensation?
Not on its own. The unification decision of 2018 does not make SGK income a condition of entitlement and accepts a presumption that children support their parents. The amount is still calculated according to the concrete circumstances. [4]
Can a person without a formal marriage make a claim?
Yes, if the person can prove a factual and continuing support relationship, or future support based on sufficient facts. A claim of cohabitation does not in itself create an automatic right to payment. [4, 12]
If the deceased was not working, is compensation calculated?
That the deceased did not work is not in itself a ground for rejection. Facts such as domestic services, care, pension income or the future support of a child may be assessed. In every case, the lost economic contribution must be explained. [4]
Can the relatives of a wholly at-fault driver obtain payment from traffic insurance?
The same answer cannot be given for all accidents. The current coverage exceptions, the dates of the accident and the policy and the status of the parties are examined. Because there are majority decisions both accepting and rejecting claims for older accidents, a single decision is not a guarantee of payment. [2, 5, 6]
Does traffic insurance pay relatives' non-pecuniary damages?
Compulsory traffic insurance does not pay them. The claim directed at persons who are legally liable, and any voluntary policy that covers non-pecuniary loss, are assessed separately. [2, 3]
Can additional compensation be claimed after receiving a payment from insurance?
It may be possible after examining whether the payment was insufficient and the effect of the agreement. The date of payment, the distribution by person, the release and the relevant time limits are important. The same loss may not be collected a second time. [2, 9]
Must the criminal case be concluded before claiming compensation?
Conclusion of the criminal case is not a general precondition. A civil court may treat the criminal file as a matter requiring a stay for the specific question; however, this possibility does not justify neglecting the time limits for the application and for limitation. [1, 2]
Sources and legal bases
[1] Law No. 6098, Turkish Code of Obligations, in particular Arts. 50–56, 72, 74 and 76. Statutory text for the basic provisions; for the 2026 supplementary provisions, see [9] below.
[2] Law No. 2918, Road Traffic Law (Karayolları Trafik Kanunu), in particular Arts. 85, 91–99 and 109–111.
[3] General Conditions of Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance (Karayolları Motorlu Araçlar Zorunlu Mali Sorumluluk Sigortası Genel Şartları), Sections A.5, A.6, B.2 and C.11; text incorporating the amendment of June 12, 2026.
[4] Grand General Assembly for Unification of Case Law of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay İçtihatları Birleştirme Büyük Genel Kurulu), June 22, 2018, E.2016/5, K.2018/6, nature of the right to support; relationship of parents and the SGK.
[5] 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 4. Hukuk Dairesi), February 5, 2024, E.2023/13594, K.2024/1061, claim of relatives of a wholly at-fault driver/operator; affirmance of the rejection by majority and dissenting opinion.
[6] 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, March 10, 2025, E.2023/7323, K.2025/4022, claim of supported persons in an accident of 2012; majority reversal decision and dissenting opinion.
[7] 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, October 15, 2025, E.2024/532, K.2025/14162, separation of agricultural income and personal labor; affirmance of the judgment after the earlier reversal.
[8] 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, October 21, 2024, E.2022/12513, K.2024/9982, effect of the claimants' status as driver and operator.
[9] Law No. 7589, text as accepted by the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye, accepted July 16, 2026; Official Gazette July 31, 2026, No. 33326; Arts. 18–20, provisional Arts. 1/9–10 and Art. 26. Grand National Assembly law record.
[10] Insurance Arbitration Commission, How to Apply, preliminary application to the insurer and the 15-day period in traffic insurance.
[11] Guarantee Account, Frequently Asked Questions, bodily injury caused by an uninsured or unidentified vehicle and exceptions to coverage.
[12] Gürsoy, Kemal Tahir, “Compensation for Loss of Support” (Destekten Yoksun Kalma Tazminatı), Ankara University Faculty of Law Journal (Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi), 1972, Vol. 29, Nos. 1–2, pp. 143–197; in particular on the nature of the right and regular assistance. Historical doctrinal source.
[13] Turkish Civil Code No. 4721, Art. 25; passing to the estate of the decedent's claim for non-pecuniary damages.
[14] Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 (Türk Ticaret Kanunu), Arts. 4, 5 and 5/A; jurisdiction in commercial disputes and mediation as a condition precedent to suit.