Whether a property transferred under a contract of maintenance until death can be taken back depends on the nature of the breach of the duty of care, on whether the contract can still continue, and on whose name the title is registered in. The care creditor may ask for the contract to be terminated and, where the conditions are met, for the title to be returned to his or her name. Conversely, a care debtor who has performed the care but has not received the promised property may also raise a registration claim. The heirs' right to sue is assessed separately from these two positions. [1, 2, 3]
For this reason, the first question is not only "was care provided?" It must be determined who is seeking what, and on which right. The living care creditor's claim that the contract was breached, the claim of simulation by the deceased (muris muvazaası) raised after death, and the care debtor's registration claim against the heirs each require different evidence and different legal conditions.
What does a contract of maintenance until death provide for the title?
Under the Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK) art. 611, the care debtor undertakes to look after and care for the care creditor for the rest of the latter's life, and the care creditor undertakes to transfer his or her assets or specific asset values. The contract creates reciprocal obligations. The transfer of a house in return for care is not a gift merely because it is made between close relatives. [1]
The contract and the transfer of ownership are not the same transaction
The document may provide for the immediate transfer of the property, or it may only create a duty to transfer it in the future. The existence of a valid contract does not mean that a registration not yet made in the land registry is treated as having been made. The title record, the official deed and the maintenance contract must be read together. Where a separate document contains a duty of care alongside a sale recorded in the land registry, the relationship between those documents must be explained separately. [1, 2]
TBK art. 612 requires the form of an inheritance contract for a maintenance contract that does not appoint an heir as well. The special written-form exception in the law for care institutions recognised by the State is reserved. Accordingly, a document signed within a family that says "if you look after me, the house is yours" does not by itself form a valid maintenance contract capable of supporting a registration claim. The form of the act, the authorised official, the witnesses and the intention of the person performing the transaction must be examined. [1, 2]
Does the care creditor have to be seriously ill at the date of the contract?
No. A need for care that may arise in the future can also be the subject of the contract. The death of an elderly person shortly after the contract does not, by itself, invalidate the transaction. The decision of the Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation dated 10 December 2025, E.2024/563, K.2025/808, states that a specific need for care does not have to exist at the time of establishment; on the other hand, the real purpose and the scope of the transferred assets must be investigated. This statement does not mean that every maintenance contract is immune from objections by heirs. [4]
How is the scope of the duty of care determined?
Care may consist of more than paying money or making occasional visits. TBK art. 614 regulates duties such as suitable food and housing, and care and treatment during illness. When the concrete scope is determined, the care creditor's previous living conditions, the content of the contract and the value of the transferred property are considered together. [1]
Whether the parties lived together matters; however, sharing the same address alone does not prove that care was provided, and living at different addresses does not prove that it was not. The provision of medicines, transport to health facilities, nutrition, hygiene, safe accommodation and support in times of need must be made concrete. Whether the care debtor used suitable helpers is also assessed in terms of the continuity and quality of the service.
Does the care creditor's conduct affect the outcome?
Defences claiming that the care debtor was prevented from providing the service, was not admitted to the home, or that living together became intolerable because of the other party's conduct are examined. A general accusation is not enough for this purpose. It must be shown which care was offered on which date, why it could not be provided, and whether alternative solutions were proposed. Fault and the sustainability of the contract are relevant to the assessment of termination and of any possible compensation. [1]
| Issue to examine | Useful document or information | Indicator that is not sufficient on its own |
|---|---|---|
| Health and treatment support | Examination, medication, accompaniment and transport records | Only advanced age or a diagnosis of illness |
| Daily care | Witness statements based on direct observation, service and needs records | Being registered at the same address |
| Defence that care was obstructed | Correspondence, formal notices, offers and concrete event information | A general account of a family dispute |
| Nature of the transaction | Notarised document, official deed, complete title transaction file | Only a current land registry extract |
In which circumstances can the contract be terminated?
Significant imbalance between performances and six months' notice
TBK art. 616 allows termination by notice given six months in advance where there is a significant imbalance between the reciprocal performances and the party receiving more cannot prove an intention to make a gift. This differs from a claim that no care was provided at all. The imbalance is assessed using the calculation method set by the law; performances already rendered in the past are also subject to balancing. [1]
The high value of the property does not determine the outcome on its own. The possibility that care will continue for an indefinite period, the parties' economic and social circumstances and the conditions under which the contract was made are important. Comparing the value of the entire care relationship mechanically with a few months' fees, based on a date of death that occurred later, may be misleading.
Termination without notice for serious breach or important reason
Under TBK art. 617, where a breach of the obligation makes the continuation of the contract intolerable, or where important reasons make its continuation impossible or excessively burdensome, termination without notice may come into question. The party at fault may have to return what was received and pay appropriate compensation to the party without fault. Not every minor disruption has the same result; the seriousness, duration and effect of the breach and the parties' conduct must be explained. [1]
The court may also consider ending the shared living arrangement and granting the care creditor a lifetime annuity. Because this option is set out in the law, it cannot be said that "if there is a dispute about care, the title always returns". Whether the annuity solution is appropriate in the concrete case, and whether it can be performed securely, is what matters. [1]
Death of the care debtor
TBK art. 618 gives the care creditor the right to request termination within one year of the death of the care debtor. In that case, the money that may be claimed from the heirs is subject to the special measure set by the law. The provision should not be read as meaning that in every case the transferred house returns in kind and automatically. The death of the care creditor and the death of the care debtor do not produce the same legal consequence. [1]
How does the Court of Cassation distinguish between non-performance of care and registration claims?
2026/1155: Title cancellation in favour of the care creditor
In its decision dated 2 March 2026, E.2025/5596, K.2026/1155, the 7th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi) examined a case in which a person who had transferred property in return for care claimed that the care had not been provided. The local court assessed the witness statements, the health examination and the parties' defences, and ordered the cancellation of the contract and of the title record. [5]
The Court of Cassation affirmed the decision, after correcting explanations that had been mistakenly taken from another file. The decision is therefore not a reversal ordering that the care obligation be investigated. Nor can it be read as meaning that hearing only relative witnesses is an automatic ground for rejection; it rests on a concrete assessment of the evidence. [5]
2026/3517: The care debtor's registration claim
In its decision dated 29 June 2026, E.2025/5182, K.2026/3517, the 7th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation examined a case in which a person who stated that they had cared for their father sought registration of the shares in the property that the contract had agreed would be left to them. The heirs argued that the care had not been provided and that a transaction made with a fingerprint by a literate person was invalid. [6]
The court assessed the fact that the person could not sign because of partial paralysis, and the conditions under which the official document was drawn up, and accepted that the care had been provided. The decision accepting the claim was affirmed. The decision does not lay down a general rule that every fingerprint-based transaction by a literate person is valid. It shows that the transaction file and the formal requirements were examined on the specific facts. [6]
2026/1139: A procedural reversal is not the same as a merits-based finding
In its decision dated 2 March 2026, E.2026/341, K.2026/1139, the 7th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dealt with an action brought by the care creditor that continued after his or her death; service on the estate representative was discussed. The majority, assessing the fact that electronic service had not been made on the representative, who was a lawyer registered with the bar, and the date on which the matter became known, reversed the decision so that an appellate review could be carried out. [7]
The outcome of the decision is not that the breach of the duty of care has been conclusively proven, or that the title will necessarily be cancelled. The reversal is a procedural decision that enables a legal remedy to be examined. It shows that errors in pursuing the case and in representation can delay even the examination of a substantive claim that appears strong. [7]
What can heirs claim if the care creditor dies?
The claim that care was not provided is separated from an independent inheritance right
It should not be assumed that, after death, heirs may exercise in full, in the care creditor's place, a personal right of termination based on improper performance of the care that the creditor did not use during his or her lifetime. On the other hand, whether a lawsuit brought during the creditor's lifetime, and claims to assets that had already arisen, are pursued by the heirs or by the estate representative is a separate question. Decision 2026/1139 should be read in the context of the continuation of an existing lawsuit after death. [6, 7]
Heirs may assert, on their own independent grounds, that the transaction is invalid because of lack of legal capacity, a defect of form or simulation. A claim for abatement based on infringement of the reserved portion is also assessed separately; TBK art. 615 preserves this right. However, it cannot be said that a genuine and reciprocal maintenance contract is always subject to abatement. The conditions relating to a transaction with consideration, a claim of a concealed or mixed gift, and infringement of the reserved portion must be kept distinct. [1, 4]
Does the fact that care was provided end the examination for simulation?
No. The existence of genuine care is an important piece of evidence, but the transaction as a whole is assessed. In decision K.2025/808 of the Civil General Assembly (HGK), although care had been provided, the single and valuable asset transferred, family relationships and the real purpose were assessed together, and a decision of persistence (direnme kararı) that insisted on a finding of simulation by the deceased was reversed. This conclusion cannot be reached merely because the person "transferred all of his or her property". [4]
This separate cause of action is examined in detail in the guide on title cancellation and registration for simulation by the deceased. Mixing, in the same petition, the performance of a maintenance contract with a claim of asset diversion makes it unclear which facts support which claim.
Against whom, where and with which documents is the action brought?
In a title cancellation and registration claim based on the contract, as a rule the civil court of first instance (Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi) has jurisdiction; for claims concerning the property itself, the exclusive venue of the place where the property is located is taken into account. The care debtor, the current registered owner and the debtor of any money claim sought may not be the same person. The land registry office is not automatically a defendant in this private-law dispute merely because it carried out the transaction. [2, 3]
If the property has passed to someone else, the acquisition of the later person and the nature of the right asserted are examined. A later breach of the contract does not automatically render every subsequent entry in the title record wrongful. If the property is transferred during the action, Code of Civil Procedure (HMK) art. 125 also comes into play. If a payment claim is made as an alternative to the title claim, the debtor, the damage and the order of the claims must be clearly set out. [2, 3]
The following documents in the case file complement one another and are useful:
- A certified copy of the contract, its annexes, the official deed, and all transfer records of the title.
- Records showing the agreed scope of care and how it was actually carried out.
- Health documents, care expenses, correspondence and witnesses who know the concrete facts.
- Notices concerning termination or the performance of the care, and service documents.
- If there has been a death, a certificate of inheritance, the ongoing lawsuit and decisions on the representation of the estate.
If there is a risk that the property will be transferred, the grounds for an interim injunction (ihtiyati tedbir) and the prima facie proof must be prepared separately. Bringing an action does not automatically lock the title. The possibility of a statutory mortgage should also be reviewed at the outset: TBK art. 613 and the Turkish Civil Code (TMK) arts. 893–894 are considered together; this security cannot be treated as automatically entered on the title, and the time limit for the registration claim matters. [1, 2, 3]
For court fees and costs, the value of the dispute, the share claimed, and the need for an on-site inspection (keşif) and an expert (bilirkişi) report are determined. It cannot be said how many months the action will take, nor that it has a single fixed cost. The mere existence of a property dispute does not make every case subject to mandatory mediation; where the claim also concerns partition or the termination of co-ownership, Law No. 6325 art. 18/B is examined separately. [3, 8]
For further details on the subject, you may read our article on recovery of a donated property.
Conclusion
Recovering the title in a contract of maintenance until death is linked to the concrete scope of the care and to the legal consequences of the breach. The continuation of the contract, termination with or without notice, the lifetime annuity and the options for return must be assessed separately. The registration claim of the person who performed the care forms the other side of the same contract.
Effective file preparation brings together the official documents, the day-to-day operation of the care, notices and the current status of the title. When the heir's simulation claim is separated from the care creditor's personal right, both the correct claim and the correct evidence become clearer.
Frequently Asked Questions
If I am not cared for, does the title to the house I gave return immediately?
No. The nature of the breach, the conditions for termination and the status of the title are examined. In a suitable case, the court may also consider a lifetime annuity solution. The action and the claim must be properly framed.
Does one have to be seriously ill to make a maintenance contract?
No. A need for care that may arise in the future can also be the subject of the contract. The fact that care could be provided for only a short time afterwards does not, by itself, mean that the contract is invalid.
Is not living in the same house as the care debtor by itself a ground for termination?
Not in every case. The content of the contract, the care actually provided, the reason for living apart and whether the needs were met are assessed together.
Can my other siblings have the maintenance contract annulled?
Leaving the property to one sibling is not enough on its own. The specific conditions of claims such as simulation, lack of legal capacity, defect of form or abatement must be met. The care creditor's personal right of termination must be separated out as well.
I looked after my father, but the title was not transferred to me. Can I bring an action?
If a valid contract exists, together with the promised property or share and the conditions for performance, a registration claim may be assessed. The form of the contract and the performance of the duty of care are important.
What happens if the care debtor dies before me?
Under TBK art. 618 there is an option to request termination within one year. The consideration that may be claimed from the heirs is subject to a special regulation; it is not assumed that the title returns automatically.
Can a literate person make a maintenance contract with a fingerprint?
The question cannot be answered on the basis of literacy alone. Whether the person was able to sign, the reason for the fingerprint and the official form rules are examined. The assessment in decision 2026/3517 rests on the fact of partial paralysis and on the transaction file.
When the contract is terminated, are past care expenses disregarded?
No. Depending on which termination provision applies, the performances rendered, balancing, fault and compensation are assessed. It should not be assumed that the entire value of the property can be reclaimed without any calculation.
Sources and legal bases
1 — Law No. 6098, Turkish Code of Obligations (Türk Borçlar Kanunu), in particular arts. 611–619.
2 — Law No. 4721, Turkish Civil Code (Türk Medeni Kanunu), in particular arts. 545, 640, 705–706, 893–894 and 1023–1025.
3 — Law No. 6100, Code of Civil Procedure (Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu), in particular arts. 2, 12, 111, 125, 190, 297 and 389–397.
4 — Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation, 10 December 2025, E.2024/563, K.2025/808, in particular paras. 31–45; official text to be verified.
5 — 7th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, 2 March 2026, E.2025/5596, K.2026/1155, full text of the decision as publicly available; affirmed with corrected reasoning.
6 — 7th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, 29 June 2026, E.2025/5182, K.2026/3517, full text of the decision as publicly available; affirmed on the acceptance of the registration claim.
7 — 7th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, 2 March 2026, E.2026/341, K.2026/1139, full text of the decision as publicly available; reversed on grounds of service and appellate review, with a dissenting opinion.
8 — Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes, arts. 17/B and 18/B.