— Family Law
Maintenance in divorce proceedings is not a single institution. Interim maintenance ordered while the case continues, maintenance paid to a spouse after divorce, and maintenance paid for a child are subject to different conditions and end for different reasons. This article covers the statutory basis of the three types, how the amount is set and how maintenance can later be varied.
The rules on maintenance appear in articles 169 to 182 of Turkish Civil Code no. 4721, which govern divorce, and in articles 327 to 332, which govern the parents' duty of support.
The most common problem in practice is confusing the three types. Interim maintenance ordered during the case does not automatically become spousal maintenance once the divorce is final; spousal maintenance must be claimed separately. The office's work in this field is set out on our Antalya divorce lawyer page.
The conditions and time limits here follow the texts of the Turkish Civil Code and the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law in force.
The law in force can be consulted in the current consolidated text on mevzuat.gov.tr.
The basis of interim maintenance is article 169 of the Turkish Civil Code, which provides that once divorce or separation proceedings are brought, the judge takes of their own motion the provisional measures necessary for the duration of the case.
The Code gives examples: the spouses' housing and support, the management of their property, and the care and protection of the children. Interim maintenance is the most common of these measures.
The own-motion rule matters: the judge may take a measure considered necessary even if neither party asks. In practice, stating the request expressly in the petition or reply still helps it to be considered before the first hearing.
No inquiry into fault is made for interim maintenance. Its purpose is to support the financially weaker spouse and the children during the case. As a provisional measure, it ends when the divorce judgment becomes final.
Spousal maintenance, known in Turkish law as poverty maintenance, is governed by article 175, which sets three conditions.
First, the spouse claiming must be one who will fall into poverty as a result of the divorce. The test is not absolute poverty but becoming unable to support oneself after divorce.
Second, the claimant's fault must not be greater. Equal or lesser fault does not bar the claim, but a spouse whose fault is greater cannot claim spousal maintenance.
Third, the amount is set in proportion to the other party's financial means. The article states expressly that the paying spouse's fault is not required: maintenance may be ordered even if the paying spouse bears no fault at all.
Under the text of the Code, spousal maintenance may be claimed without limit of time. It ends only on the grounds of automatic termination and discharge described below.
Under article 176, spousal maintenance may be ordered as a lump sum or, as circumstances require, as periodic payments, that is monthly.
Periodic maintenance ends automatically in two situations: the recipient's remarriage and the death of either party. No separate action is needed.
In three situations maintenance is discharged by court order: where the recipient cohabits as if married without marrying, where their poverty ceases, or where they lead a dishonourable life. In these cases the paying party must bring an action to discharge.
The distinction between automatic termination and discharge by court matters in practice. Where the claim rests on alleged cohabitation, stopping payment before bringing proceedings exposes the paying party to enforcement.
The basis of child maintenance is article 182. When granting divorce or separation, the court regulates the parents' rights and their personal relations with the child.
Under that article, the spouse not granted custody must contribute to the child's care and education costs according to their means. Child maintenance is the money equivalent of that contribution.
Unlike spousal maintenance, child maintenance involves no test of fault. Its basis is not the relationship between the spouses but the parents' duty of support towards the child.
Article 327 sets the general framework: the costs of the child's care, education and protection are borne by the parents. Article 329 provides that the parent actually caring for the child may bring a maintenance action against the other on the child's behalf.
Under article 328, the parents' duty of support continues until the child reaches majority.
The same article provides an extension: where the child's education continues after majority, the parents must support the child until the education ends, to the extent that can be expected of them in the circumstances. That duty is assessed separately for the adult child.
Article 330 governs the amount: maintenance is set having regard to the child's needs and the parents' living conditions and ability to pay, and the child's own income is also taken into account.
Maintenance is paid monthly in advance. Payment is therefore due at the start rather than the end of the month, which matters in determining when arrears begin.
An option often overlooked in maintenance claims is an order for future increases.
Article 176 for spousal maintenance, and articles 182 and 330 for child maintenance, provide the same rule: on request, the judge may determine how much periodic maintenance will be payable in future years according to the parties' social and economic circumstances.
The order is made on request, not automatically. If not requested, the amount stays fixed and a separate action is needed to increase it.
The maintenance claim should therefore expressly include a request for future increases.
A maintenance order is res judicata but not unchangeable. The Code allows maintenance to be reset when circumstances change.
For spousal maintenance, article 176 provides that periodic payments may be increased or reduced where the parties' financial circumstances change or fairness so requires.
For child maintenance, article 331 provides that on a change of circumstances the judge, on request, resets the amount or discharges the maintenance.
Under article 177, for maintenance actions brought after divorce the court of the maintenance creditor's domicile has jurisdiction. If the creditor lives in Antalya, the action may be brought in Antalya even if the paying party lives in another province.
Whether spousal maintenance not claimed in the divorce case can be claimed later depends on article 178.
Under that article, rights of action arising from the end of the marriage by divorce become time-barred one year after the divorce judgment becomes final.
The period covers claims for spousal maintenance. If no action is brought within one year of the judgment becoming final, the claim will face a limitation defence.
In uncontested divorces where the protocol makes no express provision on maintenance, this period deserves particular attention.
A maintenance order can be enforced through enforcement proceedings based on a judgment, and proceedings are brought for accumulated arrears.
Article 344 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law provides a sanction specific to maintenance: a debtor who fails to comply with a maintenance order may, on the creditor's complaint, be ordered to coercive detention of up to three months.
Coercive detention is not a punishment but a means of compelling payment. If the order is complied with after detention begins, the debtor is released.
The article also protects the debtor: where the debtor has brought an action to discharge or reduce the maintenance, detention may be deferred until that action ends, having regard to the grounds put forward. For the general route followed in family law files in Konyaaltı and the surrounding area, see the Konyaaltı lawyer page.
The questions below concern this provision; more general questions are answered on the frequently asked questions page.
Interim maintenance is a provisional measure under article 169 of the Civil Code during the case, with no inquiry into fault. Spousal maintenance under article 175 is awarded after divorce to a spouse who will fall into poverty and whose fault is not greater.
Yes, provided their fault is not greater. A spouse with equal or lesser fault may claim; the paying spouse's fault is not required.
It ends automatically on the recipient's remarriage or the death of either party. It is discharged by court order on cohabitation as if married, cessation of poverty or a dishonourable life.
Under article 328 the duty of support lasts until majority. For a child whose education continues after majority, the parents remain liable, to the extent reasonable, until the education ends.
No. On request the judge may determine the amount payable in future years. If not requested, the amount remains fixed.
Under article 177 of the Civil Code, the court of the maintenance creditor's domicile has jurisdiction.
It can be enforced through judgment enforcement proceedings. Under article 344 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law, a non-complying debtor may be ordered to coercive detention of up to three months on the creditor's complaint.
Under article 178, rights of action arising from divorce become time-barred one year after the divorce judgment becomes final, so the claim must be brought within that period.
Three points decide maintenance files: identifying the correct type of maintenance, including a request for future increases in the petition, and not missing the one-year limitation period. Assuming that interim maintenance continues automatically after divorce is the most common cause of lost rights.
The office's fields of work are set out on the practice areas page. For an assessment specific to your file, you may reach the office through the contact page.