Research date: October 11, 2026
A parent who alone holds custody may, as a rule, make decisions on the child's care, education and place of residence. For this reason, under Turkish law, relocating abroad with the child does not in every case depend on the consent of the other parent or on a separate court decision. However, the exercise of that authority must conform to the scope of the custody decision, the child's best interests, the arrangements for personal contact and the international rules applicable in the concrete case. Passport, visa and residence procedures are also assessed separately. [1] [2]
For a parent planning a move, the central question is not merely whether the border can be crossed. It must also be made clear how the child will live in the new country, how education will continue and how the bond with the other parent will be maintained. A parent who opposes the move must set out the objection on the basis of concrete reasons relating to the child's life. This guide addresses, for disputes connected with Türkiye, the rights of both sides, the routes of application and the documents to be prepared.
Does the right of custody confer authority to determine where the child will live?
What does it mean for custody to be given to one parent?
Article 339 of the Turkish Civil Code provides that decisions on the child's care and education are to be taken with regard to the child's interests. Article 342 of the Code also provides that the mother and father, within the framework of their custody, are the child's legal representatives. Where custody has been left to one parent on divorce, these powers are in substance exercised by that parent. The determination of the place where the child will live is assessed within this framework. [1]
Custody, however, is not an authority to apply a parent's personal preferences to the child without limit. Finding work abroad or remarrying may be understandable reasons for moving; however, how the child's care, education and family ties will be protected is examined separately. The existence of authority to relocate and the question of whether a particular plan of relocation serves the child's interests are different questions.
The first check should not be limited to the sentence in the operative part stating that "custody has been given to the mother/father". The days of personal contact, any interim measures, later decisions and whether the decision has become final should be read together. Where a decision has been given in another country, the recognition of that decision and the powers it grants to the parents also fall to be considered.
How does the position change under joint custody and interim custody?
As long as the marriage continues, the mother and father exercise custody jointly. In separation or divorce proceedings, the judge may make interim arrangements for the care and protection of the child. The existence after divorce of a decision providing for joint custody is a separate possibility. These situations cannot be treated as the same as custody left to one parent by a final decision. [1]
Under joint custody, a decision that permanently changes the child's centre of life should not be treated as an ordinary day-to-day matter. The parents' decision-making powers and the existing judgment must be examined; where there is a dispute, it should be considered whether to ask the court for an arrangement consistent with the child's interests. As regards interim custody, the purpose and scope of the decision and the measures in the pending action are decisive. The mere fact that the child is in fact living with one parent does not prove an unlimited and permanent authority to settle.
Is the consent of the other parent or a court decision required to settle abroad?
What does the Court of Cassation's 2023 decision clarify?
In the decision of the Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 2. Hukuk Dairesi) dated May 10, 2023, E. 2023/694, K. 2023/2329, permission was sought for children whose custody lay with the mother to attend a language course in France for one year. The regional court of appeal accepted the request. The Court of Cassation, however, held that the mother already had authority, by reason of her custody and legal representation, to take the children abroad, and that there was no legal interest in requesting a separate permission; it therefore quashed the decision. [2]
The practical importance of the decision is that a separate "action for permission to take the child abroad" is not automatically required for every trip or plan of relocation. However, the event concerned a one-year education plan. The decision does not say that every permanent move is in the child's interest, nor that decisions on personal contact may be disregarded. The quashing here relates to the requirement of legal interest for a separate request for permission in the concrete file.
What happens if a consulate or foreign authority requests additional documents?
The existence of custody authority under Turkish law does not mean that the same documents will be sufficient for all administrative procedures in the destination country. Current information should be obtained from the consulate or immigration authority of the country concerned on the acceptance of the custody decision, documents relating to the other parent, translation, certification and residence conditions. The list of documents may vary according to the type of application and the child's situation.
Where a concrete request for a document or a refusal exists, a written copy of it should be kept. When considering an application to the court, the legal obstacle to be removed should be explained; the request must be distinguished from an abstract application for permission that merely repeats an existing authority. Under HMK Art. 114 and 115, legal interest is a condition of the action. It is not correct either to treat a visa refusal as a mandatory precondition in every case, or to assert that every document problem must necessarily be resolved by court permission. [3]
Does a travel consent permit permanent relocation?
Why do the purpose and limits of a written consent matter?
The effect of a written consent is determined by its content and by the law applicable to it. Consent given to a holiday between particular dates is not, of itself, consent to the child living indefinitely in another country. On the other hand, whether consent is required at all cannot be determined without examining custody and decision-making powers. The absence of the document is not in every case unlawful by itself; its presence does not in every case create an unlimited authority to relocate. [1] [9]
Where an agreement is made about permanent settlement, the country, the intended start date, the education and care plan, personal contact, travel costs and the communication arrangements should be clearly stated. Such an agreement may have aspects subject to court supervision in the interests of the child. Parents cannot waive the child's rights without limit.
| Situation | Principal legal distinction | Priority check |
|---|---|---|
| Custody with one parent | In every case, the consent of the other parent is not separately required | Scope of the decision, interim measures and contact arrangements |
| Joint custody | Permanent relocation affects joint decision-making powers | Joint decision or a judicial arrangement suited to the dispute |
| Interim custody | Not equated with a final and unlimited authority to settle | The pending action and the content of the interim decision |
| Consent for a fixed-term holiday | Not the same as consent to permanent settlement | Purpose, duration, conditions of return and the law applicable |
| Foreign custody decision | Powers are not determined solely by the Turkish terminology | Effect of the decision, law of the habitual residence and agreements |
For the preparation of a consent document and the procedure for a travel permit to go abroad, you may consult our article on taking a child abroad and the consent document.
Does obtaining a passport or residence permit resolve the dispute?
A passport, visa or residence permit does not, by itself, resolve a dispute about custody and personal contact. These documents matter for the relevant administrative procedures; whether the rights of the other parent have been infringed is assessed under different legal rules. Likewise, an apostille serves to verify the official nature of a document; it does not by itself guarantee that a custody decision will be fully enforced in a foreign country.
No single "six-month period" valid in all countries and for all procedures should be assumed for consent documents. The document's own period, its revocation, and the current conditions of the authority to which the document will be presented should be checked separately. Carrying out these checks before purchasing an air ticket helps prevent a relocation that is legally possible from being delayed by a missing document.
How is the child's best interests assessed in a decision to relocate?
Education, care and family ties are examined together
The assessment is not made by asking which country is generally better. The child's present life is compared with the proposed new life. The quality of the school, language support, access to health services, safe housing, who will provide daily care and the parent's working hours should be made concrete. Higher income does not by itself make all of these points favourable. [1]
The parent seeking to relocate may show the feasibility of the proposal through an employment contract, a school admission letter, housing documents and a care plan. A parent who objects should not merely say that he or she does not wish to be separated; he or she should explain which concrete need of the child the move would jeopardise, and why the alternative proposed is more suitable. For example, the interruption of continuing treatment or the failure to meet the child's educational support needs are claims that may be investigated separately.
The court's own investigation of the child's best interests does not render the parties' submission of documents unimportant. Dated and verifiable records ensure that an expert examination is based on real living conditions. Comparing a plan prepared by one side with the concrete objections of the other parent is also necessary for a sound decision.
The child's views and the Constitutional Court's decision in Pervin Hazan Yağcı
A child should be heard in decisions affecting him or her, to the extent that the child's age and maturity allow. Hearing the child's views does not mean placing the responsibility for the decision on the child or forcing a choice of "mother or father". The child's wishes are considered together with the care relationships, safety and expert assessment. TMK Art. 339 provides that the child's opinion is to be taken into account as far as possible on important matters. [1]
In its decision of April 30, 2024 on the application of Pervin Hazan Yağcı (Application No. 2022/60016), the Constitutional Court (AYM) examined a request to take a child whose custody lay with the father to Cyprus and to change custody to the mother. Expert reports, the child's views and the child's relationship with the parents were assessed; during the proceedings it was also recorded that the father and the child had returned to Türkiye. The Constitutional Court found the application inadmissible on the basis that it was manifestly ill-founded, having regard to the sufficiency of the investigation and reasoning in the process. [4]
This decision cannot be read as approving every relocation abroad. Its importance lies in showing that the child's living conditions, views and family ties must be investigated concretely. The decision is also not a Hague return provision; it concerns the constitutional safeguards in a custody dispute.
How does relocation affect personal contact and custody?
How is the contact arrangement adapted to the new distance?
An existing personal contact decision is not removed by a one-sided statement by one parent. Where a decision providing for contact every weekend has become difficult to apply across the distance between countries, a new arrangement should be sought. Appropriate solutions may include longer contact during school holidays, alternating sharing of certain festivals and regular video communication. Periods are determined according to the child's age, school and the burden of the journey; there is no single compulsory holiday period for every child. [1]
A workable plan should not merely say "contact will be permitted". The place of handover, departure and return dates, who will accompany the child on the flight, how tickets will be bought, the sharing of costs, the time difference and how a missed contact will be made up should be set out. Video contact is arranged with regard to the child's needs; it is not an unconditional and permanent substitute for face-to-face contact.
It cannot be assumed that travel costs always fall on one parent. The means of the parties, the reason for the distance, the child's needs and the arrangement to be established should be considered together. Reaching agreement may facilitate implementation; where the dispute continues, the claim concerning costs should also be made concrete.
For the contact rights of a parent living abroad, our article on contact between a child and a parent living abroad may also be consulted.
Does moving abroad lead to a change of custody?
TMK Art. 183 regulates the measures required where new facts, such as going to another place, make them necessary. Moving does not mean the automatic loss of custody. However, a disruption of the child's care, the failure to meet the child's educational and health needs, or the obstruction of the child's relationship with the other parent in a manner contrary to the child's interests may require a new assessment. [1]
Under TMK Art. 324, failure to comply with the requirements of a personal contact arrangement may lead to a change of custody, provided that this is not contrary to the child's interests. The aim is not to punish the parent but to protect the child. Events that prevent contact should be shown by dates, correspondence and official records of implementation. The fact that one parent is wealthier, or that the other lives in a foreign country, does not on its own form a sufficient basis for assessment.
The transfer of custody to the other parent is not the same as the removal of custody within the meaning of TMK Art. 348. Removal relates to the more severe conditions in the Code, and is not resorted to in every relocation dispute. For the implementation of a personal contact decision in Türkiye, the provisions of the Child Protection Law on the handing over of children and on personal contact are also taken into account. [1] [14]
How can the other parent object to the relocation?
Imposing a general consent requirement is different from protecting the child
In the decision of the Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 2. Hukuk Dairesi) dated November 20, 2025, E. 2025/5404, K. 2025/9980, the father requested that the children's departure abroad on his days of personal contact be made conditional on his consent. The first-instance court so decided, and the appeal was dismissed. The Court of Cassation quashed the decision, stating that there was no legal interest in a request to make the departure of children whose custody lay with the mother conditional on the father's consent; it pointed to the statutory remedies available in the event of a breach of personal contact. [5]
This decision does not say that the father's right of contact is unimportant. The distinction it draws is between a general consent requirement that makes every departure dependent on the other parent's discretion, and an assessment of the breach and of the legal remedy appropriate to the child's needs. The same distinction applies to the mother where custody lies with the father.
The objecting parent's claim may take the form of a re-arrangement of personal contact, the taking of necessary protective measures or, if the conditions exist, a change of custody. The relief sought must be framed to fit the events relied on. A general request that "my child must not go abroad" must explain which right it protects and against which concrete danger.
How is an urgent measure distinguished from an indefinite travel ban?
Where there is a close and concrete danger, temporary legal protection should be considered without delay. Preparations to take the child away despite an existing decision, statements that the child will not be returned, or serious findings about the safety of care may be presented with supporting evidence. However, lodging an application does not by itself stop a relocation; the scope of the decision given and its implementation must be followed separately. The legal regimes of the measures under TMK Art. 169 in divorce proceedings and of the interim measures under HMK Art. 389 et seq. must not be confused. [1] [3]
In the decision of the Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu) dated March 20, 2013, E. 2012/2-799, K. 2013/389, a continuing travel ban maintained out of concern that a foreign-national mother might take the child away and not bring the child back was considered. The Assembly found that, in the concrete case, a permanent ban was not lawful, and quashed the resistance decision; it separated the temporary restriction for the protection of the child from a permanent ban. [6]
The legal basis, necessity, duration and proportionality of a measure must therefore be shown. The mere fact of foreign citizenship, or of relatives living abroad, cannot in every case be the ground for an unlimited ban. Where there is domestic violence or a security danger, protective measures and, where necessary, confidentiality arrangements under Law No. 6284 are also assessed separately; the addresses hidden by a protection order should not be required to be disclosed. [13]
Which court should be approached, and which time limits matter?
Correct framing of jurisdiction and of the request
In custody and personal contact disputes in Türkiye, the competent court is, as a rule, the family court; where there is no family court, the statutory allocation applies. The place of application is determined according to the request. The court of the place where the child resides also has jurisdiction over the arrangement of personal contact. A change of custody is listed among non-contentious proceedings under HMK Art. 382, and therefore under HMK Art. 384, unless a special provision applies, the court of the place of residence of the person making the request or of one of the interested persons has jurisdiction. [1] [3] [7]
Where a foreign element exists, this domestic-law explanation is not sufficient on its own. Under MÖHUK Art. 1(2), international agreements are reserved; the special jurisdiction provisions of an applicable agreement, read with the international jurisdiction rule in Art. 40, must be examined. The conclusion that "I am a Turkish citizen, so I can always decide in Türkiye" cannot be drawn. [8]
The application should clearly show the current custody and personal contact decisions, the other parent's details, the date of relocation, the changed circumstances and the new arrangement sought. A child is not made a defendant merely because the subject of the dispute is the child, in claims made by the parents against each other. Where there is a conflict of interest requiring separate representation of the child, the need for a curator for representation under TMK Art. 426 should be assessed separately. [1] Identity and health documents of the child should be submitted to the file only to the extent necessary.
Time limits, legal remedies and costs
There is no single "time limit for objecting to settling abroad". The period varies according to the type of application, the nature of the decision and the notification. The HMK time limits set out below apply only to the situations in which that procedure is applied; they should not be automatically transferred to all family-law measures. [3]
| Step | Time limit and starting point | Consequence to note |
|---|---|---|
| Appeal in non-contentious proceedings | Two weeks from learning, subject to special provisions; HMK Art. 387 | Waiting for service may create a risk of time limit |
| General rule on appeal | Two weeks from proper service; HMK Art. 345 | The nature of the decision and any special provision are checked |
| Request for enforcement of an HMK interim measure | One week from announcement or service on the party requesting the measure; Art. 393 | If not requested in time, the measure lapses of its own accord |
| Principal action after an HMK measure obtained before the action | Two weeks from the request for enforcement; Art. 397 | The action must be filed and the document placed in the file of the enforcing officer |
| Objection by a party to an HMK measure ordered without a hearing | Enforcement without delay if ready; otherwise one week from service of the enforcement record; Art. 394 | Unless the court orders otherwise, the objection does not stop enforcement |
Appeal on points of law to the Court of Cassation is not open against every decision connected with custody. HMK Art. 362 contains restrictions for decisions given in non-contentious proceedings and for decisions on temporary legal protection. A custody arrangement attached to a divorce judgment and an independent application for a change of custody should not be assumed to be subject to the same regime of appeal on points of law. For decisions open to appeal on points of law, the general period is two weeks from service; the specific ruling and the conditions for the remedy must be checked. [3]
Court fees, advances on costs, expert examination, service abroad, translation and certification costs vary according to the file. The conditions and exceptions relating to security in an interim measure are assessed under HMK Art. 392. Where economic conditions do not allow, the legal aid provisions in HMK Art. 334 et seq. may be examined. Giving a fixed cost of proceedings or a definite duration of completion would be misleading in these disputes. [3]
When does settling abroad become a child abduction and return dispute?
For the Hague Convention and the return action, you may consult our article on international child abduction and return of the child.
How are habitual residence and the right of custody determined?
Under the 1980 Hague Convention, the essential question is whether, immediately before the removal or retention, the child's habitual residence was in a State whose law conferred a right of custody that was actually exercised, or would have been exercised but for the removal or retention. Habitual residence is an assessment of the factual centre of the child's life; it is not determined solely by a population register entry, nationality or the address reported by a parent. The Convention includes within the right of custody the power to determine the child's place of residence. [9]
For this reason, looking only at the word "custody" used in a Turkish decision may not be sufficient. Foreign law, a court decision or a valid agreement may also have conferred on the other parent a power to determine the place of residence. Blocking the right of personal contact alone does not mean that, in every case, the conditions for return under the Convention are met. The scope of the right of custody and the right of contact must be investigated separately. Academic commentary also explains that this distinction of concepts is decisive for the nature of international protection. [9] [12]
Hypothetically, if one of two parents with joint decision-making power does not return the child at the end of a permitted holiday, a wrongful retention may arise. On the other hand, the relocation by a parent who alone has decision-making power is not automatically treated as abduction merely because the other parent objects. In both examples, the source of the powers and the dates of the events are decisive.
Are a return request and the protection of the right of contact the same process?
For the application of the 1980 Convention, the child must not have reached the age of 16 and the States concerned must both be bound by the Convention. A claim of wrongful removal or retention must be pursued without delay. The one-year period in Art. 12 of the Convention is not a general limitation period that extinguishes the return request in its entirety; it is relevant to the assessment of whether the child has settled in the new environment. In the calculation, the date of the wrongful removal or retention and the start of proceedings before the competent judicial or administrative authority in the State where the child is located are important. The conditions of exceptions, such as consent, subsequent acceptance, grave risk and the objection of a child of sufficient maturity, are examined separately. [9]
A return decision does not definitively resolve the substance of custody. For the establishment or protection of the right of contact, the central authority route under Art. 21 of the Convention may be considered separately. The Ministry of Justice's implementation guide addresses return and personal contact applications under separate headings. In an application connected with Türkiye, the central authority function of the Ministry and the public prosecutor's channel described in the guide should be taken into account. [9] [11]
Which country's authorities become competent after the move?
To the extent that it is applicable, the 1996 Hague Child Protection Convention is important for jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement. General jurisdiction is linked to the child's habitual residence; in the case of a wrongful removal or retention, the jurisdiction of the earlier State continues under specific conditions, and special rules exist for urgent measures. The Convention covers children up to the age of 18. [10]
It cannot be said that every relocation automatically erases existing decisions, or that the entire custody arrangement must necessarily be rebuilt in the new country. The provisions of the Convention on the continuation of existing measures, on recognition and on enforceability should be examined. In situations outside the Convention, the rules of the country concerned and other agreements are assessed. The implementation abroad of a Turkish decision and the recognition or enforcement in Türkiye of a foreign decision are also different procedures. [8] [10]
The question of initiating custody proceedings in Türkiye while a child lives abroad is addressed in our article custody proceedings in Türkiye where the child lives abroad.
Which documents should be prepared before the move?
Documents should be prepared not merely to create a travel file, but also to show that the child's new life is workable. The list below does not mean that the same documents are compulsory in every case; it is adapted to the needs of the file.
| Document group | Sample documents | Matter clarified |
|---|---|---|
| Custody and personal contact | Current decisions, related finality and notification records | Who exercises which power, and the valid limits |
| New living arrangements | Employment contract, housing document, residence application or permit | Reality of the plan and sustainability of care |
| Education and health | School admission, language support, required treatment plan | Continuation of the child's individual needs |
| Contact plan | School calendar, travel options, costs and handover proposal | How the bond with the other parent will be maintained |
| Consent and correspondence | Written consent, dated notices, requests from authorities | Scope of the consent and concrete content of the dispute |
| Breach or danger | Implementation minutes, lawful correspondence, records of the concrete events | Basis for a protection or amendment request |
Documents should be arranged in chronological order; the need for translation and certification should be confirmed with the relevant authority. Publishing the child's photographs, health records or correspondence with the other parent on social media should not be used as a method of pursuing rights. Evidence should be obtained lawfully and shared only to the extent necessary with the competent judicial or administrative bodies.
Where there is no need for security or confidentiality, giving written notice of the intention to relocate some reasonable time in advance, with a concrete proposal for contact, may facilitate the resolution of the dispute. This does not mean that there is a fixed notice period applicable to all files. If the disagreement persists, the adaptation of the existing decision to the new circumstances should be considered in good time, rather than waiting for the difficulties that will arise after the move has been completed.
Conclusion
The settlement abroad of a mother or father who alone exercises custody with the child is not, in every case, subject to the consent of the other parent. That authority, however, must be exercised after examining the child's living conditions, the existing decisions, personal contact and international law together. The mere fact that a passport or residence permit has been obtained does not replace this examination.
The priority of a parent planning a move should be to prepare a workable plan for care, education and contact. A parent who objects should set out the concrete danger and the solution in the child's interests, rather than seeking a general prohibition. When the scope of the custody decision, the type of application and international jurisdiction are examined together, the correct legal route can be identified. For the relevant scope of service, see our custody law page.
Frequently Asked Questions
If custody lies with the mother, can she settle abroad with the child without the father's consent?
As a rule, sole custody includes the power to decide where the child will live. However, existing decisions, the child's interests, personal contact and the foreign law or agreements that apply must be checked. Where custody lies with the father, the same assessment is made in respect of the mother. Related section
Under joint custody, can one parent decide to relocate alone?
Permanent relocation affects joint decision-making powers. The existing custody arrangement and the scope of the decision should be examined; where there is a dispute, a judicial arrangement consistent with the child's interests should be considered. Unlimited authority to settle cannot be derived from the authority for day-to-day care. Related section
In every case, is it necessary to obtain a permission to leave the country from the family court?
No. A request for permission that merely repeats the authority of a sole custody holder may encounter a lack of legal interest in the concrete case. Where there is an administrative document problem or a custody dispute, the request should be framed on that concrete need. Related section
Does a consent given for a holiday also cover permanent settlement?
Not automatically. The purpose, duration and content of the document are examined. It is also determined, within the framework of the custody powers and the applicable law, whether the consent of the person concerned is legally required. Related section
Does a parent who moves abroad lose custody?
Not automatically. The effect of the move on the child and the need for a change are assessed. Care conditions contrary to the child's interests, or the obstruction of personal contact, may lead to a change of custody when the conditions are met. Related section
Can a child's departure abroad be banned indefinitely?
An abstract fear of removal does not justify an indefinite ban. The legal basis, concrete necessity, duration and proportionality of the interim measure to be requested for the protection of the child should be assessed. Related section
Does video contact replace face-to-face contact?
Not automatically. It supports communication over a long distance; during holiday periods, face-to-face contact, handover and travel arrangements should be separately planned according to the child's needs. Related section
If a child has been taken abroad, must the child necessarily be returned?
No. The applicability of the Hague Convention, the child's age, habitual residence, the right of custody alleged to have been breached and the exceptions to return are assessed. Not every relocation is a wrongful removal. Related section
Does the right to apply end when one year has passed under the Hague Convention?
One year is not a general preclusive period for making an application. It may affect the assessment of settlement in the new environment. Nevertheless, delay may make the child's situation and the proof more difficult, so the application should be assessed promptly. Related section
Is a Turkish custody decision automatically enforced in a foreign country?
Such a result cannot be stated for every country and every procedure. The applicable international conventions and the law of the foreign country are examined. Recognition, enforceability, translation and certification are to be kept separate. Related section
Sources and legal bases
- Republic of Türkiye Legislation Information System. Turkish Civil Code No. 4721 (Türk Medeni Kanunu), in particular Art. 21, 169, 182–183, 323–326, 335–339, 342, 346, 348 and 426. Current consolidated text.
- Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 2. Hukuk Dairesi), May 10, 2023, E. 2023/694, K. 2023/2329. Custody authority and legal interest in a request to take children abroad. Full published text of the decision, Karamercan Hukuk — secondary publication.
- Republic of Türkiye Legislation Information System. Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu), in particular Art. 114–115, 334 et seq., 345, 361–362, 382–387, 389–394 and 397. Current consolidated text.
- Constitutional Court (Anayasa Mahkemesi), Pervin Hazan Yağcı, Application No. 2022/60016, April 30, 2024; in particular §§ 5–10, 25–31 and the operative part. Official decision record; secondary publication of the full text, Hukuki Haber.
- Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 2. Hukuk Dairesi), November 20, 2025, E. 2025/5404, K. 2025/9980. Request to make the departure abroad on personal contact days conditional on the consent of the other parent. Full published text of the decision, Kanun Yolu — secondary publication.
- Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu), March 20, 2013, E. 2012/2-799, K. 2013/389. Continuing travel ban and regulation of personal contact. Full published text of the decision, Hukuki Haber — secondary publication.
- Republic of Türkiye Legislation Information System. Law No. 4787 on the Establishment, Duties and Trial Procedures of Family Courts (Aile Mahkemelerinin Kuruluş, Görev ve Yargılama Usullerine Dair Kanun), Art. 2 and 4. Ministry of Justice publication; consolidated text, LEXPERA.
- Republic of Türkiye Legislation Information System. Law No. 5718 on Private International and Procedural Law (Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk ve Usul Hukuku Hakkında Kanun), Art. 1–2, 40 and 50–59. Current consolidated text.
- Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH). Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction of October 25, 1980; in particular Art. 3–5, 12–13, 19 and 21. Full text of the Convention.
- HCCH. Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children of October 19, 1996; in particular Art. 2, 5, 7, 11, 14, 16, 23 and 26. Full text of the Convention.
- Ministry of Justice, Directorate General for Foreign Relations and European Union. Implementation guide to the Hague Convention on international child abduction; return and personal contact applications. Official guide.
- Akduman, Ebru. "Protection and Visitation Rights under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction" ("Uluslararası Çocuk Kaçırmanın Hukuki Yönlerine Dair Lahey Sözleşmesi Uyarınca Koruma ve Ziyaret Hakkı"). Public and Private International Law Bulletin, 2020, 40(2), 1373–1402; in particular pp. 1397–1399. DOI: 10.26650/ppil.2020.40.2.0076. Full text of the article.
- Grand National Assembly of Türkiye; Ministry of Family and Social Services. Law No. 6284 on the Protection of the Family and Prevention of Violence against Women (Ailenin Korunması ve Kadına Karşı Şiddetin Önlenmesine Dair Kanun), in particular Art. 3–5 and 8. Text as adopted by the TBMM, March 8, 2012; Ministry of Family and Social Services, statements on measures and confidentiality.
- Republic of Türkiye Legislation Information System. Child Protection Law No. 5395 (Çocuk Koruma Kanunu), Art. 41/A et seq. on the handing over of children and the establishment of personal contact with children. Current consolidated text.