Support maintenance (yardım nafakası) is livelihood support that a person who would otherwise fall into poverty may claim, under statutory conditions, from their ascendants, descendants or siblings. Not every relative is bound by this duty. For siblings, an additional requirement of being well-off applies, and the order of heirs is taken into account when deciding against whom the claim should be directed. The amount requested must strike a balance between the claimant's necessary subsistence and the obligor's financial capacity. [1]
A claim by parents against an adult child, an adult child's claim against a parent who cannot work, or the mutual support duty between siblings may rest on different facts. This guide covers the general support maintenance under the Turkish Civil Code No. 4721 (TMK), Articles 364–366. It also explains the link with the care claim of an adult child who is still in education under TMK Article 328(2), but it does not treat the two provisions as fully identical.
Who can be asked for support maintenance?
TMK Article 364 names ascendants, descendants and siblings. Relationships between parents, children and grandchildren are assessed within this framework; the statutory provisions on more remote ascendants are also significant. Uncles, maternal uncles, paternal aunts, maternal aunts, nephews, cousins, or persons related only by in-law ties, are not among the support maintenance obligors listed in this provision. A close family relationship or high income alone does not place a duty on a person who is not listed. [1, 2]
| Relationship | Core assessment | Specific point |
|---|---|---|
| Parents and adult child | Need, ability to pay and order of claims | The relationship may be subject to a mutual support duty |
| Other ascendants and descendants | Kinship, order and financial circumstances | Closer obligors must be examined first |
| Siblings | Need and order of claims | The obligor sibling must be well-off |
| Spouses | Provisions specific to marriage and divorce | Not confused with the general support regime of TMK Article 364 |
| Other collateral relatives or in-laws | Not counted under TMK Article 364 | Kinship or wealth alone is not sufficient |
The duties of parents to care for their children and the maintenance obligations between spouses remain reserved. Support maintenance is not a shortcut for cases where these special care arrangements are considered ineffective. First it must be determined from which legal relationship the person may derive support, and whether that support is actually available. [1]
How is the poverty requirement assessed?
To claim support maintenance, a person does not have to have no income at all. Income may be insufficient to meet basic living needs. Necessary expenses such as housing, food, clothing, health care and transport are assessed according to concrete circumstances. On the other hand, the mere fact that a relative is wealthier is not, by itself, sufficient reason to raise the claimant's standard of living to that relative's level. [1, 3]
Does receiving a pension or social assistance prevent the claim?
The name of an income does not determine the outcome on its own. The amount of a pension, rent expense, the need for regular treatment and other sources are examined together. If social assistance is received, its type, its continuity and the need it covers must be explained. Presenting a one-off payment as regular monthly income, or failing to show any regular income at all, can undermine the assessment.
Assets are not disregarded either. The economic function of an income-producing property differs from that of the single home in which one lives. The claimant's resources, the possibility of benefiting from them and their necessary needs must be investigated. A claimant must honestly disclose not only their income but also those assets that affect the calculation of need.
Where the claimant is an adult who is able to work
Working capacity, state of health, occupation, job-search efforts and concrete employment opportunities are important. Adulthood alone does not mean that a need for support can never exist. Conversely, a person who has a real opportunity to earn enough for their subsistence but, without a reasonable cause, does not use it cannot be disregarded. [1, 4]
A person whose capacity to work is limited by disability or illness cannot have their need determined by the age on their civil registry record alone. Health reports, treatment costs and the scope of social support are important. There is no general statutory rule applying to everyone that says support maintenance always ends at age 25.
Why does the order of heirs matter in a claim?
TMK Article 365 provides that a support maintenance action should be brought with regard to the order of heirs. This reference does not mean that someone has died or that an estate must be opened for a claim to be made. It determines, for the benefit of a living person, against which relative a support duty should be directed first. [1, 2] For a detailed assessment, see What Happens If the Maintenance Obligor or Creditor Dies?
May a wealthy sibling be sued directly?
A sibling's good economic situation is not sufficient on its own. The existence and ability to pay of the obligors ranking ahead are examined first. In the Court of Cassation 3rd Civil Chamber (Yargıtay 3. Hukuk Dairesi) decision dated 25 February 2016, E.2015/15058, K.2016/2662, the order of priority was expressly addressed for descendants, parents and siblings who are well-off. The problem of turning to a sibling before it has been shown that the children and the parents lack the ability to pay was emphasized. [2]
In the concrete case, the claimant had descendants and maintenance from them had been ordered. The Chamber therefore found the decision accepting the claim against the sibling to be erroneous. This result should not be read as meaning that the mere existence of a prior-ranking person in the civil registry always closes the next rank; their ability to provide support is also examined.
More remote ascendants, several persons within the same class, or files involving special forms of family ties require the order to be established separately. It is not possible to resolve every case with the sentence "sue the richest relative". Civil registry records and financial inquiry must be carried out together.
If there are several obligors, is the debt divided equally?
The contribution of several persons in the same rank is assessed according to their ability to pay. A support maintenance debt cannot be presumed to be joint and several merely because of kinship. The fact that one person is more easily reachable does not automatically justify shifting the entire burden onto them. TMK Article 365(3) also allows the obligation to be reduced or removed where a claim against one or several persons would be contrary to equity. [1, 2]
What does the prosperity requirement for siblings mean?
The obligation of siblings depends, in addition to the ability to pay assessed for parents or children, on a prosperity condition. Receiving a regular salary cannot be treated as equivalent to living in prosperity. The sibling's own subsistence, the persons they are obliged to support, the continuity of their income and their assets are examined together. [1, 6]
For example, a high apparent gross income may not create the same freely available spending power because of mandatory health costs and care obligations. Conversely, regular rental or commercial income that is inconsistent with the declared income may be investigated. The assessment must not rest only on outward appearances or social media posts.
In legal scholarship, the prosperity requirement is explained as narrowing the sibling's duty and keeping it secondary to the duty of care. This view helps in understanding the statutory distinction; it does not provide a ready prosperity threshold that fixes the amount. Current income must still be investigated. [6]
Does not speaking with a parent for years remove the duty?
A severed family relationship is not a general ground that automatically extinguishes support maintenance. Support maintenance is not structured as a debt left entirely to a person's conscience, depending on how close the past relationship was. Nevertheless, the particular facts of each case, equity and claims of abuse of rights must be assessed on their own evidence. [1, 3]
The Court of Cassation's decision on a father and his children
In the Court of Cassation 3rd Civil Chamber decision dated 25 January 2017, E.2016/21312, K.2017/595, a father who faced economic and health problems asked his children for support. The children argued that the father had not fulfilled his paternal duties and that communication had broken off. The Chamber stated that weakened family ties alone do not remove the obligation. [3]
The outcome of the decision was not an unconditional acceptance of the amount the father requested. Because there were contradictions to be investigated between the obligors' income, loans, business expenses and the child maintenance they paid for their own child, the judgment was reversed. Thus the broken relationship and the ability to pay were evaluated as separate issues. [3]
This approach should not be presented as meaning that a serious claim of abuse or of abuse of rights will never be heard. Equally, it should not be assumed that the statement "we have not spoken for a long time" will achieve a result on its own. The nature, gravity and documentation of the allegation matter; moral judgment does not replace legal conditions.
The difference between educational support for an adult child and support maintenance
TMK Article 328(2) regulates the care duty of parents toward a child who, despite having reached adulthood, continues education, to the extent that can reasonably be expected of the parents according to circumstances and conditions. TMK Article 364 is the general family support that prevents a person from falling into poverty. In practice, claims by adult students may be discussed together with these provisions; however, every element of the special educational care under Article 328 is not identical to the conditions of general support maintenance. [1, 4]
The decision of the Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (HGK) dated 14 November 2019, E.2018/904, K.2019/1181 assesses job-seeking after graduation and KPSS preparation through concrete need. The decision separates the need at the date the action was brought from a later start of employment. No rule should be drawn that graduation automatically ends support at once, or that KPSS preparation is by itself a reason for indefinite payment. [4]
The adult claimant's request concerns their own right. It cannot be presumed that the former custodial status of the father or mother continues in the same way. If a special situation requiring guardianship or representation exists, it is examined separately. The periods covered by an earlier child maintenance judgment (ilam) and the new support need must be kept apart.
Action, evidence and competent court
Family courts are responsible for support maintenance disputes. Where no family court exists, the civil court of first instance acts in that capacity. Under TMK Article 365, the court of the place of residence of either party has jurisdiction. The Court of Cassation 5th Civil Chamber decision dated 6 November 2023, E.2023/4275, K.2023/10265 is one of the examples concerning this special jurisdiction rule in the context of support maintenance for an adult child. [1, 5, 7]
The petition should set out the kinship, the need, the priority obligors, the defendant's ability to pay and the amount requested. The simplified procedure applied in maintenance cases does not reduce the importance of submitting documents and facts on time. The relief sought and the starting period should be clearly stated. [8]
| Review heading | Document or information | Contribution to the file |
|---|---|---|
| Kinship and order | Civil registry records, earlier maintenance decisions | Identifying the correct obligor |
| Need | Rent, health, basic expense and income documents | Establishing the real subsistence shortfall |
| Ability to pay | Wage, pension, rental and commercial activity records | Measuring the contribution |
| Other obligors | Financial circumstances of persons in the same rank | Fair distribution |
| Sibling's prosperity | Income continuity, assets, care burdens | Examining the special condition |
The judge may be asked to obtain records from banks, the land registry, SGK and other relevant institutions. The claimant should make the facts they know concrete. The obligor must also document their necessary expenses and other care obligations. Submitting only a list of debts does not, in every case, prove that the debt exists or that it has priority.
Institutional claims, start date and later changes
TMK Article 365 also grants a right of action to official or public-benefit institutions that provide for a claimant entitled to maintenance. TMK Article 366 regulates that institutions obliged to provide care for persons in need of protection may claim the costs they incurred from the related obligor relatives. The institution's authority, the scope of the care and the expenses claimed must be examined. These provisions do not mean that any care institution may collect without limit from all relatives. [1]
Support maintenance is a regular payment for the future, and claims for care costs incurred in the past on a different basis must be assessed separately. It is not presumed that a debt for every year before the action accumulates automatically. By contrast, instalments already due under an earlier judgment may form a collectible receivable.
When need or financial capacity changes, a new assessment may come up. Where it is requested under TMK Article 365, the amount for future years may be set according to the social and economic situation of the parties. No single annual index applies automatically to every support maintenance award. Stopping payments without changing the existing judgment may lead to a dispute over collection. [1]
Conclusion
In support maintenance, the correct defendant, the real need and the ability to pay must be determined at the same time. For siblings, the prosperity requirement and the order of claims are particularly important; for parents, an independent financial examination separate from the family relationship is essential. A documented livelihood calculation and a fair distribution among obligors ensure that the case is properly structured for both the person entitled and the person who must pay.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a parent claim support maintenance from an adult child?
If the parent would fall into poverty without support and the child's financial capacity is adequate, the parent may claim it under the statutory conditions. The amount is neither automatic nor fixed. [1, 3]
Can a person receiving a pension get support maintenance?
It is examined whether the income meets basic needs. The existence of a pension is not, on its own, a definitive reason for acceptance or rejection. [1]
Can a wealthy sibling be sued directly?
First the order of claims and the ability to pay of the obligors ranking ahead are examined. A sibling's prosperity alone is not sufficient. [2]
Does a sibling's employment show that they are well-off?
Not on its own. Income, assets, necessary expenses and care obligations are assessed together. [1, 6]
Can support maintenance be claimed from an uncle or a cousin?
These persons are not among the obligors listed in TMK Article 364. Kinship alone and high income do not create a general support maintenance duty. [1, 2]
Do children pay equal amounts to their parents?
Contributions are assessed according to ability to pay. Being in the same rank does not always mean an equal amount or a joint and several debt. [1, 2]
Do I owe support maintenance to a father I have not spoken to for years?
The end of the relationship does not remove the debt on its own. Need, ability to pay, and any special claims of equity or abuse are examined. [3]
Does support maintenance always end at age 25?
No general age limit applies to all support maintenance awards. Need and the legal basis are examined. [1, 4]
Can a nursing home or care institution ask relatives for payment?
A claim may arise within the conditions of TMK Articles 365–366 and the nature of the institution. There is no unlimited right for every institution and every expense. [1]
Where is a support maintenance action filed?
It may be filed in the family court, at the place of residence of either party under TMK Article 365. Where no family court exists, the competent court acts in that capacity. [1, 5, 7]
Sources and legal bases
- Turkish Civil Code No. 4721, Articles 2, 4, 328 and 364–366.
- Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, 25 February 2016, E.2015/15058, K.2016/2662. Official full text.
- Court of Cassation, 3rd Civil Chamber, 25 January 2017, E.2016/21312, K.2017/595. Official full text.
- Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (HGK), 14 November 2019, E.2018/904, K.2019/1181. Official full text.
- Court of Cassation, 5th Civil Chamber, 6 November 2023, E.2023/4275, K.2023/10265. Official full text.
- Seda İrem Çakırca, Mutual Maintenance Obligation Between Siblings (Kardeşler Arasında Nafaka Yükümlülüğü), Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 64/1, 2015, pp. 65–101; particularly pp. 85–86.
- Law No. 4787 on Family Courts (Aile Mahkemeleri Kanunu), Articles 2 and 4.
- Law No. 6100 on Civil Procedure (Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu), Articles 316–319.