Non-Pecuniary Damages in Traffic Accidents: Who Can Claim and How Is the Amount Determined?

Non-pecuniary damages in a traffic accident are the monetary redress that a person whose bodily integrity has been harmed may claim for the pain and emotional shock suffered. Where there is serious bodily harm or death, relatives may also make claims in their own names. There is no fixed tariff that everyone can use for the amount; the judge assesses the characteristics of the event and of the person making the claim. Compulsory motor liability insurance does not cover non-pecuniary damages. For a claim directed at an insurer, a valid non-pecuniary damages coverage must also exist. [1–3]

This guide explains the rights of the injured person and of relatives; the determination of the amount, the persons liable, the scope of insurance, proof and the assessment to be made before a lawsuit. Calculation of incapacity to work resulting from injury and calculation of loss of support resulting from death are separate pecuniary loss topics. Non-pecuniary damages are not determined by taking a certain percentage of those calculations.

What harm do non-pecuniary damages in a traffic accident redress?

Article 56 of the Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK) regulates the infringement of bodily integrity and the non-pecuniary harm suffered by relatives because of serious bodily harm or death. Pain endured during treatment, the narrowing of freedom of movement, a permanent scar, changes in the person’s social life and emotional effects linked to the accident may enter the assessment. There must be a legally sufficient causal link between the accident and the harm alleged. [1]

In pecuniary damages, economic losses such as treatment expenses, loss of earnings or care needs are examined. In non-pecuniary damages, by contrast, the adverse effect on personal integrity and on life is what matters. The two claims may be raised together if their conditions are met. The payment of health expenses or the receipt of pecuniary damages does not, by itself, show that the non-pecuniary harm has also been redressed.

Damage to the vehicle alone, and distress felt because of it, does not on its own create a right to non-pecuniary damages. If the accident also had an effect on the person’s bodily or emotional integrity or on another personality value, that infringement and its legal basis must be made concrete. An automatic non-pecuniary damages amount cannot be attached to every traffic accident.

Who can claim non-pecuniary damages?

Injured drivers, passengers, pedestrians and other persons

A person who suffers bodily harm in the accident may claim his or her own non-pecuniary harm, whether a driver, passenger, pedestrian or cyclist. Owning a vehicle or working in a paid job is not a precondition. The bodily integrity of a child, a student, a retired person or a person who carries out household work is also legally protected. A child’s claim is raised in the child’s name, taking the rules of representation into account; it is not merged with the parents’ own claims into a single family claim.

Permanent impairment is not a mandatory condition of the injured person’s own claim for non-pecuniary damages. The pain a person who has recovered at the end of treatment experienced in the accident, and the surgery and recovery process, are still assessed. Not being entitled to compensation for permanent incapacity to work does not mean that non-pecuniary damages will necessarily be rejected as well. This distinction can be seen concretely in the decision of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay) dated February 19, 2024, examined below. [5]

Relatives of a seriously injured person

For a relative to make a claim in his or her own name, the serious bodily harm condition in Article 56/2 of the TBK is important. Not every distress felt because of any injury to a spouse or child gives rise to compensation under this provision. The effect of the injury on the person’s life, danger to life, the nature and duration of treatment, permanent consequences and the need for care are examined together.

The law does not set a disability percentage threshold that could be applied to everyone. The classification of injury used in the criminal file also does not by itself complete the whole assessment. For example, in a file with 22 percent disability, danger to life and a nine-month recovery period were assessed together. It cannot be concluded from this file that a 22 percent rate will necessarily be required for relatives to make a claim. [4]

The relative’s actual relationship and the effect of the event on the relative’s own life should also be explained. In legal scholarship, whether this harm is direct or reflected loss has been debated; the current law expressly provides for relatives’ claims in serious bodily harm. For this reason, the injured person’s right and the relative’s own non-pecuniary harm are examined separately. It cannot be said that the relative must necessarily have the same health loss or the same disability rate. [1,15]

Spouse, children, parents and other relatives of a deceased person

In the event of death, the subject of the claim is the non-pecuniary effect of the loss the relative has experienced. The spouse, children and parents are the main groups of rights holders. The claim of a sibling, a fiancé or fiancée, or another person with a strong de facto closeness may also be assessed according to the characteristics of the event. The concept of relative in the law is not limited to the persons in the certificate of inheritance.

However, the title of kinship does not produce the same result in every event and for everyone. Living together, the continuity of the relationship, the sharing of daily life and the effect the death has had on the person may be examined. Not living in the same home does not, by itself, eliminate the bond of closeness either. Particularly in more distant kinship or relationships outside the family, the de facto bond must be shown clearly. A 2026 decision stating that the maternal uncles’ claims in an injury event should be rejected also shows this distinction. [6]

For non-pecuniary damages, it is not required that economic support was received from the deceased. The material support relationship examined in compensation for loss of support is different from the personal closeness in non-pecuniary damages. The non-pecuniary claim of a sibling who did not receive economic support may be examined; on the other hand, the mere fact that money assistance was given does not make everyone entitled to non-pecuniary damages.

The relative’s own right and an inherited claim are different

The relative’s personal right to non-pecuniary damages arising from the death is not calculated according to the inheritance share. The conditions are assessed separately for each person making a claim. The lack of heir status does not alone prevent this personal claim if the conditions of de facto closeness are present.

The passing to the heirs of the deceased person’s own claim for non-pecuniary damages, which arose during his or her lifetime, is a different matter. Under Article 25 of the Turkish Civil Code, this claim must have been raised by the decedent. Accordingly, the claim of a person who lived for a while after the accident, arising from his or her own injury, and the claims of relatives arising from that person’s death are subject to separate legal assessment. [12]

How is the amount of non-pecuniary damages determined?

There is no fixed tariff or automatic calculation formula

The judge determines the amount of non-pecuniary damages at his or her discretion; however, the decision must rest on the characteristics of the specific event and be reasoned. The fracture of the same bone, the same disability rate or belonging to the same age group does not show that the same amount will result in two files. An actuarial report can help with the calculation of pecuniary loss; it cannot make the assessment of non-pecuniary damages in place of the judge.

Amounts from old decisions found on the internet cannot be used as today’s tariff. The year the decision was given, as much as the date of the accident, the amount claimed, the stage of the proceedings and the characteristics of the injury being compared also matter. An amount found low or affirmed in one decision does not form a minimum or maximum limit in another file. An old amount updated merely with an inflation coefficient also does not fix the amount the court will award.

The treatment process and changes in daily life

The place and severity of the injury, surgeries, the time spent in hospital and intensive care, pain, restriction of movement, permanent scars and the need for future treatment are assessed together. The effect of the same health problem on a person’s age, way of life and activities may differ.

For example, being unable to meet one’s own needs for a long time, being kept away from education or experiencing emotional problems linked to the accident may matter in the assessment. Instead of listing these only in general terms, how long they lasted and by which records they are supported should be explained. Where psychiatric or psychological assessments exist, they may contribute to the file; no diagnosis can be made of a person on the basis of general lists of symptoms in articles.

Fault and economic conditions

The fault of the parties, the manner in which the accident occurred and the severity of the harm matter in determining the amount. Partial fault does not eliminate the claim entirely in every case. However, non-pecuniary damages are not tied to a mandatory calculation of multiplying a predetermined fixed price by the fault percentage. The judge assesses the conduct of the injured person together with the other conditions.

If the harm arose solely from the person’s own conduct and there is no cause requiring another person’s legal liability, payment cannot be demanded from someone else merely because the accident occurred. On the other hand, a single statement in a fault report should not be regarded as sufficient to reach a definitive conclusion without examining all the liability relationships.

The social and economic situations of the parties and the purchasing power of money also enter the assessment. It cannot be assumed that the pain of a low-income person is worth less. The purpose of compensation is not punishment or the making of a gain; it is to determine redress appropriate to the non-pecuniary harm the event has caused the person. [4,5]

From whom are non-pecuniary damages claimed?

A driver at fault may be named as a defendant within the scope of tort liability. As to the vehicle’s operator and, where the conditions are met, the owner of the enterprise to which it is attached, the liability provisions of Article 85 et seq. of the Highway Traffic Law (KTK) are assessed separately. It is not required in every case that the operator was personally at the wheel or personally violated a traffic rule. Although the registration holder and the operator are the same person in many files, long-term leasing and de facto operating relationships should be investigated. [2]

Where there is more than one person liable, the provisions on joint and several liability matter. That a claim can be directed at different persons does not mean that more than one payment can be received for the same harm. On the other hand, the fault of the driver of the vehicle in which a passenger was travelling cannot be accepted as the passenger’s own fault; the passenger’s conduct and the relationship among those liable are assessed separately. [4]

Does the insurance company pay non-pecuniary damages?

Compulsory motor liability insurance

Article 92/f of the KTK leaves claims for non-pecuniary damages outside compulsory financial liability insurance. That the injury is serious, that death has occurred or that the pecuniary damages limit has not been used up does not change this result. The death or disability limit stated for the compulsory policy is not a separate non-pecuniary damages budget. [2]

Voluntary financial liability insurance and the additional clause

Under voluntary financial liability insurance (İhtiyari Mali Sorumluluk, İMM), non-pecuniary damages can be brought into coverage by an additional agreement. For this, the policy, its annexes and any endorsements must be examined. That a vehicle has comprehensive vehicle (kasko) insurance does not show that non-pecuniary damages protection necessarily exists. The voluntary liability coverage inside the kasko policy, or an independent voluntary liability policy, must be read separately. [3,7]

No general rule can be formed that, for non-pecuniary damages, the compulsory motor liability insurance limit must first be exhausted. Article 3 of the General Conditions of the voluntary liability insurance provides that this coverage takes effect within the voluntary liability limits, regardless of the existence of compulsory insurance. On the other hand, the per-person and per-event limit, the combined limit, persons excluded from coverage and special clauses must be checked in the specific policy. There may also be separate exclusions regarding the insured’s or the driver’s own harm and the claims of their relatives. [3]

It also matters that the policy was valid on the date and at the time of the accident. That non-pecuniary coverage is written in the title of the document is not sufficient by itself. If the issue, effective-date and cancellation records conflict, they must be clarified; the decision dated July 9, 2025 shows the importance of this distinction. [7]

An uninsured or unidentified vehicle

The Guarantee Account (Güvence Hesabı) steps in for bodily harm under certain conditions; however, it does not bring non-pecuniary harm within the scope of payment. For this reason, it cannot be said that non-pecuniary damages can be obtained from the Account in every accident with an uninsured vehicle. If the driver and other persons liable can be identified, claims directed at them are assessed separately. [16]

Which documents show the non-pecuniary harm and the grounds of the claim?

The file should connect how the accident occurred, the condition of the injured person and the reasons for the redress sought. The accident report, camera recordings, witness statements and the criminal file can clarify how the event took place. The fault assessment in the report can be objected to with concrete reasons; matters requiring expert examination are not resolved by a party’s statement alone.

As to health documents, emergency room records, discharge summaries (epikriz), surgery and treatment documents, reports and assessments of permanent consequences are important. If the relationship of current complaints to the state of health before the accident is disputed, a causation examination should be made. Choosing only the document that supports the claim from among conflicting reports does not resolve the conflict.

In relatives’ claims, besides population records, information showing the de facto relationship and the effect of the event may be useful. Living together, participation in the care process, the continuity of the relationship and witnesses’ direct observations can be explained. Health data should be submitted in a scope relevant and necessary to the file; all private-life documents should not be shared in a general internet application.

The defendant side may argue that there is no causation, that the injury was not severe enough to give rise to the relatives’ claim, that de facto closeness has not been proven, that the amount is disproportionate to the event, or that the dispute was ended by an earlier agreement. When preparing the claim, these possible defenses should be assessed on the basis of the documents.

What distinctions do the Court of Cassation decisions show?

A claim for non-pecuniary damages in an injury without permanent disability

In the decision of the 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 4. Hukuk Dairesi) dated February 19, 2024, E. 2022/15069, K. 2024/1731, the pecuniary claim of a pedestrian injured in 2012 was rejected on the ground that the pedestrian had no permanent disability; non-pecuniary damages, however, were awarded. The judgment given after an earlier reversal was affirmed in 2024. The decision shows the distinction between permanent disability and non-pecuniary harm. The reversal relating to the low amount, as recounted in the text, belongs to the earlier review; the outcome of the 2024 decision is affirmance. [5]

Serious injury and the claims of family members

In the event that was the subject of the decision of the 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated January 22, 2024, E. 2021/27370, K. 2024/720, danger to life, 22 percent disability and a nine-month recovery period were assessed together. The regional court of appeal reasoning recounted in the decision explains the claims of the spouse, children, mother, father and sibling by these conditions. The Court of Cassation affirmed the judgments it examined on the merits; it rejected the appeals of some persons because of the amount. It cannot be said that all claims were examined separately on the merits. [4]

The limit placed on the maternal uncles’ claims

In the decision of the 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated April 13, 2026, E. 2023/6652, K. 2026/4076, the judgment awarding non-pecuniary damages to the maternal uncles of an injured child was not found correct, and it was stated that these claims should be rejected. The incomplete examination of the disability reports in the file is also a separate ground for reversal. The decision shows that the facts of kinship and of taking an interest in the treatment do not automatically give a right. An unlimited rule that no maternal uncle can be a rights holder in any event should not be drawn from it either. [6]

The validity of the policy matters as much as the non-pecuniary coverage

In the decision of the 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated July 9, 2025, E. 2025/214, K. 2025/11668, the voluntary liability coverage inside a kasko policy was discussed. The earlier reversal recounted in the decision requires the investigation of an express non-pecuniary damages clause and of a valid policy covering the moment of the accident. In the later proceedings, the conclusion was reached that there was no valid policy, and the dismissal decision was affirmed. The decision does not support the claim that non-pecuniary damages can be obtained from every kasko policy. [7]

Acceptance of payment and the indivisibility of non-pecuniary damages

In the decision of the 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated March 11, 2024, E. 2022/13881, K. 2024/2674, it was explained that part of a payment received during the proceedings related to non-pecuniary damages. The Chamber stated that, within the framework of the principle of indivisibility, a decision that there is no need to rule should also be given for the non-pecuniary claim because of the payment. This is not a decision containing only an abstract explanation concerning an increase; it also shows the effect of acceptance of payment on the remaining claim. The scope of each document and the law governing the event must be examined separately. [8]

How are the amount claimed, the litigation route and costs assessed?

Determining the claim from the outset and the 2026 amendment

The settled approach of the Court of Cassation on non-pecuniary damages is toward the singleness and indivisibility of the claim. One should not proceed on the assumption that, for the same non-pecuniary harm, one can start with a low amount and then freely increase it after the expert report. The procedural options relating to the calculation of pecuniary damages do not apply automatically to the non-pecuniary claim. [8]

Law No. 7589, which entered into force on July 31, 2026, repealed Article 107 of the Code of Civil Procedure (HMK) and added to Article 109 a provision for a one-time increase in a partial action until the end of the investigation phase (tahkikat), and for the interruption of the statute of limitations on the increased part from the date of the action. The repealed Article 107 continues to apply to actions filed before it entered into force. However, this amendment does not contain a special provision expressly abolishing the indivisibility of non-pecuniary damages. For this reason, the new partial action rule cannot be presented as a guarantee of later increasing the non-pecuniary claim; current case law should be assessed together with the date of the action. [9]

When preparing the claim, the known course of treatment, permanent consequences, the non-pecuniary effect experienced and the assessments in similar events should be examined together. A claim of a harm that is not yet known or that develops later is different from claiming again, at a higher price, the same harm that was known at the outset; whether there is truly a new harm must be determined separately.

Which court or arbitration route is chosen?

For tort claims directed at the driver and the operator, where there is no special rule on subject-matter jurisdiction, the civil court of first instance generally comes into play. For a claim based on the insurance contract against the voluntary liability insurer, the provisions on commercial actions and the commercial court of first instance are assessed. Special situations such as a carriage, consumer or employment relationship can change the conditions of jurisdiction and application. The civil court of peace is not chosen by looking at the amount claimed alone. [14]

In an action in the nature of a commercial monetary claim, mediation as a condition precedent to litigation is examined separately. A written application to the insurer does not replace mediation. The reference that Article 100 of the KTK makes to Article 97 should also be taken into account in the assessment of the application for voluntary liability insurance. The written application period in the law is 15 days. [2,14]

If non-pecuniary coverage exists under voluntary liability insurance, the possibility of applying to the Insurance Arbitration Commission (Sigorta Tahkim Komisyonu) may also be investigated. In voluntary insurance, the company’s membership of the system, the status of the risk in relation to the membership date and the preliminary application requirements matter. The Commission’s application explanation distinguishes 15 business days for other insurances and 15 days for traffic insurance; when choosing the route, these two explanations should not be used as if they were the same period. Arbitration does not add coverage to a policy that has none and does not replace an independent action against the driver. [13]

Partial dismissal and the attorney fee award: the current position

Explaining costs by the old proportional allocation approach because the judge awards a lower amount than requested in non-pecuniary damages is no longer current. After the decision of the Constitutional Court (Anayasa Mahkemesi) annulling Article 326/2 of the HMK with respect to non-pecuniary damages actions, Article 10/2 of the Attorneyship Minimum Fee Tariff was also repealed on January 8, 2026. [10]

This change does not mean that the action has no costs at all or that full dismissal would have no consequences. The tariff’s fee provision for the case of dismissal in full continues. Court fees, expenses, the joint raising of pecuniary claims and the reason for dismissal must be assessed separately. The amount claimed should be justified by the actual event; a disproportionate amount should not be written merely because the costs approach has changed.

How do the criminal file, reconciliation and an earlier payment affect the right?

Must the outcome of the criminal case necessarily be awaited?

For a compensation action, it is not necessary in every case to wait for the criminal decision to become final. Under Article 74 of the TBK, the civil judge is not bound in the same way by the fault assessment of criminal law and by an acquittal decision. The effect of the material facts established in the criminal file is assessed separately. Accordingly, an acquittal does not automatically result in the rejection of the compensation claim, nor does a conviction result in the acceptance of the amount requested as it stands. [1]

Criminal reconciliation, withdrawal of the complaint and settlement are not the same transaction

For an offense within the scope of reconciliation, Article 253/19 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CMK) is important. According to the current provision, except for damages that could not be identified during the reconciliation or that arise later, a compensation action cannot be filed because of the offense under investigation; an action already filed is deemed waived. It cannot be said that this exception protects all compensation rights in every case. Which harm could be known, and when, must be assessed. [11]

Withdrawing the criminal complaint, entering into criminal reconciliation, signing a settlement agreement and waiving the civil action are different transactions. The statements in the document, the authority of the signatory, and the persons and harms for which it is drawn up should be examined. In particular, when a payment relating to non-pecuniary damages is accepted, it should not be assumed that a new action can always be filed for the remainder. [8]

Does a payment of pecuniary damages end the non-pecuniary claim?

A payment made only for pecuniary loss does not, by itself, end non-pecuniary damages. However, a release, settlement or waiver document drawn up together with the bank receipt (dekont) may contain broader wording. Before looking at the amount paid, it must be determined for which receivables and persons the transaction was made.

An earlier payment made for the purpose of redressing non-pecuniary harm also cannot be ignored. The same harm cannot be collected twice. The two-year provision in Article 111 of the KTK on cancelling inadequate or exorbitant agreements, on the other hand, is not a general right to go back on an agreement that of itself renders ineffective every in-court waiver, every final judgment (res judicata) or every criminal reconciliation. [2,8]

What should be considered regarding the statute of limitations and interest?

The general structure under Article 72 of the TBK for non-pecuniary damages is two years from learning of the harm and of the person liable, and in any case ten years from the act. If the act constitutes an offense subject to a longer criminal statute of limitations, that period comes into play. For traffic accidents, it cannot be said that eight or fifteen years automatically apply to all files; the nature of the offense, the dates of the event and of learning, and the grounds of interruption or suspension must be examined. [1]

Following the criminal file, corresponding with the insurance company or continuing negotiations should not be regarded as acts that automatically protect the time period against all those liable. The time-limit review must be done separately for each person making a claim, each type of claim and each defendant. For voluntary liability insurance, the connection between Articles 100 and 109 of the KTK is also assessed. [2]

For non-pecuniary damages against the person liable for the tort, the rule that interest runs from the date of the event, provided it has been requested, is important. The date of default of the insurer providing the coverage is determined separately on the basis of the application and the relevant regulations. The type of interest, its starting point and the periodic rate are not the same issue; the claim must be formulated clearly in the petition. [1,4,7]

The provision added to Article 55 of the TBK by Law No. 7589, which sets different interest starting points for known and unknown earnings periods, relates to loss of working capacity and loss of support. Non-pecuniary damages are not divided into two earnings periods by this calculation method. In addition, because of the amendments on the statutory interest rate, an old rate should not be applied to all years. [9]

Conclusion

A sound assessment of non-pecuniary damages in a traffic accident depends first on determining who is making a claim for which personal harm. For the injured person’s own right, permanent impairment is not mandatory; in relatives’ injury-based claims, serious bodily harm and de facto closeness matter separately. The closeness right arising from death is assessed separately from economic support and the inheritance share.

The justification of the amount should be built from the characteristics of the accident, the treatment process and the concrete effects on life. The persons liable and, if any, the valid non-pecuniary insurance coverage should be determined; payment, reconciliation and litigation documents should be examined together. If the amount claimed is prepared by assessing the current procedural provisions and time limits, a legal claim that is suited to the rights holder’s situation and open to review can be put forward.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can non-pecuniary damages be claimed if there is no permanent impairment?

Yes. Permanent disability is not mandatory for the injured person’s own claim. The injury linked to the accident, the pain experienced during treatment and other non-pecuniary effects are assessed. This should not be confused with the relatives’ claims based on serious injury.

Can the spouse of an injured person also claim compensation?

The spouse can, if the serious bodily harm condition and the conditions relating to the spouse’s own non-pecuniary harm are present. Not every injury creates a separate right for the spouse. The severity of the injury, the nature of the relationship and the effect of the event are examined together.

Can a sibling or a fiancé or fiancée claim non-pecuniary damages?

In the event of death or serious bodily harm, they can make a claim if the conditions of a concrete closeness relationship and non-pecuniary harm are present. Heir status or economic support is not the sole determinant. The title of kinship or engagement does not mean automatic acceptance for everyone.

Does traffic insurance or kasko pay non-pecuniary damages?

Compulsory motor liability insurance does not. If a kasko or independent voluntary liability policy contains valid non-pecuniary damages coverage, a claim can be directed at the insurer within the relevant scope and limit. A decision cannot be made by the name of the policy alone.

Can the amount of non-pecuniary damages be calculated precisely in advance?

No. There is no fixed tariff; the judge assesses the characteristics of the event. Precedent decisions give guidance as to reasoning and approach. The amount or disability percentage of an old decision does not alone determine the outcome of a new file.

Does receiving pecuniary damages from insurance end the non-pecuniary right?

The mere fact that pecuniary damages have been paid does not have this result. However, the scope of any release, settlement or waiver document that is signed must be examined separately. The effect of acceptance of a non-pecuniary payment on the remaining claim is particularly important because of the principle of indivisibility.

If reconciliation is reached in the criminal file, can non-pecuniary damages still be claimed?

Reconciliation may bar the compensation action under Article 253/19 of the CMK. There is a statutory exception for damages that could not be identified during the reconciliation or that arise later. A definitive answer cannot be given without examining the scope of the document and when the harm could be known.

How many years is the statute of limitations in a non-pecuniary damages action?

The general structure is two years from learning of the harm and of the person liable, and ten years from the act. A longer criminal statute of limitations may possibly apply. The nature of the event, the dates, the defendants and the acts affecting the period should be assessed together.

Sources and legal bases

[1] Law No. 6098, Turkish Code of Obligations, in particular Arts. 49–56, 58, 61, 72, 74 and 117. Text of the law. The 2026 amendment to Article 55 of the TBK is addressed separately in [9].

[2] Law No. 2918, Highway Traffic Law, in particular Arts. 85–88, 92/f, 97, 100 and 109–111. Text of the law.

[3] General Conditions of Voluntary Financial Liability Insurance for Motor Land Vehicles, in particular Arts. 1, 3 and 5. Text from the Insurance Association of Türkiye.

[4] Court of Cassation, 4th Civil Chamber, January 22, 2024, E. 2021/27370, K. 2024/720. Decision text.

[5] Court of Cassation, 4th Civil Chamber, February 19, 2024, E. 2022/15069, K. 2024/1731. Decision text.

[6] Court of Cassation, 4th Civil Chamber, April 13, 2026, E. 2023/6652, K. 2026/4076. Decision text.

[7] Court of Cassation, 4th Civil Chamber, July 9, 2025, E. 2025/214, K. 2025/11668. Decision text.

[8] Court of Cassation, 4th Civil Chamber, March 11, 2024, E. 2022/13881, K. 2024/2674. Decision text.

[9] Law No. 7589, Arts. 10, 18–20, provisional Art. 1/9–10 and Art. 26; Official Gazette (Resmî Gazete) of July 31, 2026, issue no. 33326. Text of the adopted law; Grand National Assembly (TBMM) law and publication record.

[10] Union of Turkish Bar Associations (TBB), statement of January 8, 2026 on the repeal of Article 10/2 of the Attorneyship Minimum Fee Tariff. Announcement; table comparing the old and new text.

[11] Law No. 5271, Code of Criminal Procedure, Art. 253/19; exception added by Law No. 7531. Ministry of Justice text.

[12] Law No. 4721, Turkish Civil Code, Art. 25. Grand National Assembly (TBMM) text.

[13] Insurance Arbitration Commission, How to Apply (Başvuru Nasıl Yapılır). Application and membership conditions.

[14] Law No. 6102, Turkish Commercial Code, Arts. 4, 5 and 5/A. Ministry of Trade text of the law.

[15] Elif Ayan Durhan, “Evaluation of a Court of Cassation Decision on the Question of Whether Relatives Can Claim Non-Pecuniary Damages in Cases of Serious Bodily Harm” (“Ağır Bedensel Zararlarda Yakınların Manevi Tazminat Talep Edip Edemeyeceği Sorununa İlişkin Bir Yargıtay Kararının Değerlendirilmesi”), Journal of Case Reviews (Karar İncelemeleri Dergisi), vol. 1, no. 1–2, pp. 383–400; published online February 1, 2023. In particular pp. 394–396. Article record; full text.

[16] Guarantee Account (Güvence Hesabı), Frequently Asked Questions (Sıkça Sorulan Sorular), damages outside the scope of payment. Institution statement.