Uncontested Divorce with a Foreign Spouse in Turkey: Is It Possible Without the Spouse Abroad Attending the Hearing? 2026

A spouse abroad cannot safely obtain an uncontested divorce (anlaşmalı boşanma) in Turkey without attending the hearing: the Turkish Civil Code requires the judge to hear both spouses in person. A power of attorney, a written statement or a statement taken through letters rogatory to another court does not meet this requirement, and the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay) has reversed an uncontested divorce judgment granted on a statement taken through letters rogatory. Participation by video link is at the court’s discretion, and no Court of Cassation decision has been found treating it as sufficient. If the spouse cannot attend, the action can proceed only as a contested divorce (çekişmeli boşanma), with the ground for divorce proven by evidence.

What Are the Requirements for an Uncontested Divorce with a Foreign Spouse?

The fact that one spouse is a foreign national or lives abroad does not prevent an uncontested divorce action from being filed before a Turkish court. An uncontested divorce is a divorce granted by the judge, after hearing the spouses in person, in a marriage that has lasted at least one year, where the spouses apply together or one spouse accepts the action brought by the other. The Court of Cassation has accepted that, even for spouses with no connection to Turkish citizenship, “documenting their identities and the fact that they are married is sufficient for them to file a divorce action” (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 21 April 2026, Case No. 2025/5548, Decision No. 2026/4435, by majority vote). (Turkish court decisions are cited by case number, esas or “E.”, and decision number, karar or “K.”; this article gives them as Case No. and Decision No. Quotations from Turkish statutes, regulations and court decisions are unofficial translations.) Where Turkish law applies to the action, the conditions for an uncontested divorce do not change with the spouses’ nationality:

Article 166/3 of the Turkish Civil Code No. 4721 (TCC) (unofficial translation):
“If the marriage has lasted at least one year, the marital union is deemed to have broken down irretrievably where the spouses apply together or one spouse accepts the action brought by the other. In this case, for a divorce to be granted, the judge must hear the parties in person and be satisfied that they have expressed their will freely, and must find appropriate the arrangement to be accepted by the parties concerning the financial consequences of the divorce and the situation of the children. Taking into account the interests of the parties and the children, the judge may make the changes the judge deems necessary to this agreement. If the parties also accept these changes, the divorce is granted. In this case, the provision that the admissions of the parties do not bind the judge does not apply.”

The law sets four conditions: the marriage has lasted at least one year; the spouses apply together or one spouse accepts the other’s action; the judge hears the spouses in person and is satisfied that they have expressed their will freely; and the judge finds appropriate the arrangement on the financial consequences of the divorce and on the children. For a spouse abroad, the problem lies in the third condition. When listing these conditions, the General Assembly of Civil Chambers of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu) said of the second condition that “What matters here is that the parties declare their will to divorce to the judge at the same time and at the hearing”, and it explained the third condition in these words: “The third condition is that the spouses state their will to the judge in person” (Court of Cassation, General Assembly of Civil Chambers, 18 April 2019, Case No. 2017/1941, Decision No. 2019/475, by majority vote).

The judge does not have to approve the settlement agreement (protokol) as it stands; the judge may make changes in the interests of the parties and the children, and grants the divorce if the parties also accept the changes. Agreements on the ancillary consequences of divorce are not valid unless approved by the judge either (subparagraph 5 of Article 184 of the TCC).

The general conditions of uncontested divorce, the content of the settlement agreement and how the action proceeds are explained in our article on uncontested divorce actions (in Turkish), and other family law cases in our guide to family law in Turkey. This article addresses only the questions that arise because one spouse is a foreign national or is abroad. Questions about the foreign spouse’s residence permit and citizenship application are outside its scope; for these, see our articles on Turkish citizenship by marriage and foreigners law in Turkey.

Must the Spouse Abroad Attend the Hearing?

As a rule, yes. For an uncontested divorce judgment, the route the law requires and the Court of Cassation accepts is for the spouse to attend the hearing and make their statement to the judge in person. None of the other routes has been confirmed by a Court of Cassation decision, and a judgment granted on a statement taken through letters rogatory has been reversed (see section c below).

In a case where an agreement signed by the spouses themselves was submitted at the appeal stage before the Court of Cassation, the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation reversed the judgment “for a decision to be made taking into account the provisions of the agreement bearing the signatures of the parties themselves, and after summoning the parties to the hearing and also taking their statements in person” (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 27 May 2024, Case No. 2024/4218, Decision No. 2024/3885). The Chamber maintained the same approach in 2026 (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 21 April 2026, Case No. 2026/1907, Decision No. 2026/4466).

In most cases it is enough for the spouse abroad to attend a single hearing. In practice, the settlement agreement is approved at the hearing where the spouses make their oral statements, and judgment is usually given at that same hearing; no further hearing is held. It is exceptional for the judge to defer judgment to a later hearing. For example, where the best interests of the child are at stake, the court may wait for the opinion of the psychologist, educational specialist (pedagog) or social worker on whom family courts rely (Article 5 of Law No. 4787 on the Establishment, Duties and Trial Procedures of Family Courts). If the hearing is deferred in this way, the spouse does not have to attend the later hearing again. In a case where the spouses had stated in person at one session that they wished to divorce in accordance with the settlement agreement, and their statements had been entered in the record and signed by them, the 2nd Civil Chamber held: “If, at the session where the conditions for an uncontested divorce were met and there was no obstacle to giving a decision, a decision could not be given for any reason and the hearing was adjourned to another day, the parties (in person) are not obliged to be present at the later sessions” (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 19 July 2011, Case No. 2010/9743, Decision No. 2011/12657, unanimously). The position changes if the judge proposes changes to the settlement agreement or the spouse withdraws their consent; this is explained below.

One case in which the spouse abroad was heard without attending the hearing reached the Court of Cassation through an appeal in the interest of the law (kanun yararına bozma). The plaintiff spouse, who was in France, was not present at the hearing of 6 February 2018; he was reached by video call on his son’s mobile phone, and his statement was entered in the record. The settlement agreement had been signed not by the spouses but by their attorneys. The 2nd Civil Chamber found it contrary to procedure and law to grant an uncontested divorce “without a settlement agreement signed by the plaintiff and the defendant themselves, and without the plaintiff husband being present at the hearing and heard in person by the judge of the court”, and reversed the judgment without affecting its outcome (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 4 October 2021, Case No. 2021/7601, Decision No. 2021/6759). (A reversal in the interest of the law does not remove the legal effects of the judgment.) The limits of the decision should also be noted: the case concerned a mobile phone call, not the court’s official e-Duruşma System; the agreement had been signed by the attorneys; and the hearing took place before Article 149 of the CCP was amended in 2020. The decision therefore does not directly answer the question of a video link set up by the court through its own system.

a) Is an Attorney, a Power of Attorney or a Written Statement Enough?

No. If expressly authorized in the power of attorney, a lawyer can file and pursue the action and can accept the action; however, the attorney’s statement does not satisfy the requirement that the judge hear the spouse in person. Under Article 74 of the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (CCP), unless expressly authorized, an attorney “cannot waive the action or legal remedies, release the opposing party or accept the opposing party’s action”; nor can the attorney file or pursue actions concerning strictly personal rights unless the power of attorney specifies which of those actions it covers.

A written statement of acceptance by the spouse does not replace a statement at the hearing either. In a case where the defendant accepted the action only in the statement of defense and did not attend the preliminary examination hearing, the 2nd Civil Chamber reversed the judgment, stating that “the conditions for an uncontested divorce have not been met either”; it required the proceedings to continue after service on the defendant and a decision to be made under Article 166/1 of the TCC according to the evidence (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 7 November 2016, Case No. 2015/21026, Decision No. 2016/14437).

In a case where the defendant spouse was represented under a divorce power of attorney and a “consent and authorization” document executed before a notary, the first-instance court (ilk derece mahkemesi) accepted that it could not hear the case as an uncontested divorce because the parties themselves were not present at the hearing; it heard the case as contested and, after hearing witnesses, granted a divorce under Article 166/1 of the TCC. The Regional Court of Appeal (bölge adliye mahkemesi) also stated that the case had turned into a contested divorce because the requirement of “the presence of the parties themselves at the hearing and their being heard in person” had not been met, and the 2nd Civil Chamber upheld the Regional Court of Appeal’s decision (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 14 February 2024, Case No. 2023/4062, Decision No. 2024/843). The Chamber did not discuss this reasoning separately and confined itself to its standard upholding formula.

b) Can the Spouse Attend by Video Link (SEGBİS, e-Duruşma)?

The law leaves this route to the court’s discretion; no Court of Cassation decision has been found showing that it is a reliable route for the uncontested divorce statement of a spouse abroad. Participation by video link, often colloquially called SEGBİS, is regulated in civil proceedings under the name “e-Duruşma” (electronic hearing) by Article 149 of the CCP and the regulation based on it (the e-Duruşma Regulation, or the Regulation):

Paragraphs 1 and 4 of Article 149 of the Code of Civil Procedure (unofficial translation):
“(1) At the request of one of the parties, the court may decide that the requesting party or their attorney may attend the hearing from where they are and perform procedural acts by simultaneous transmission of audio and video.
…
(4) For persons whom the court has allowed to attend the hearing from where they are by audio and video transmission, the provisions on handwritten signatures do not apply, except in the cases of admission, taking of an oath, consent to withdrawal of the action, waiver of the action, acceptance of the action and court settlement specified in subparagraph (ç) of paragraph 3 of Article 154.”

Paragraph 1 gives the court discretion: on request, the court may order participation by video link, but it is not obliged to do so. Paragraph 3 and Article 10/2 of the Regulation also provide that, in actions over which the parties cannot freely dispose, the court may decide of its own motion to hear the persons concerned by video link; this power is also discretionary, and under Article 11 of the Regulation these persons attend from the courthouse or penal institution where they are located. Paragraph 4 was added by Law No. 7589, published in the Official Gazette of 31 July 2026, and entered into force three months after publication, on 31 October 2026. It disapplies the rules on handwritten signatures for a person attending by video link, but it excludes statements such as acceptance of the action, waiver of the action and court settlement (sulh) from this relief. These statements are entered in the record after being read out to the person making them and signed by that person (Article 154/3(ç) of the CCP).

The e-Duruşma Regulation, whose full title is Hukuk Muhakemelerinde Ses ve Görüntü Nakledilmesi Yoluyla Duruşma İcrası Hakkında Yönetmelik (Regulation on Conducting Hearings by Audio and Video Transmission in Civil Proceedings, unofficial translation), matters in four respects for a spouse abroad:

• Place of participation: a party requesting e-Duruşma may attend the hearing “from a place allocated for this purpose in the courthouse or penal institution where they are located”; if attending together with their attorney, they may attend from the law office, from a room designated by the bar association, from a space allocated in the courthouse or from another suitable place meeting the conditions of the Regulation (Article 11 of the Regulation). Neither a place abroad nor a Turkish diplomatic mission is expressly listed among these places.
• Ill, elderly or disabled party: if a party who has difficulty coming to court because of illness, old age or disability so requests, the court gives priority to hearing them through e-Duruşma (Article 9/3 of the Regulation), and that person may attend from their home or the institution where they are (Article 11/4). The Regulation does not expressly address whether this place may be abroad; the rule below on repeating the statement of acceptance also applies to these persons.
• Request and decision: e-Duruşma must be requested at least two business days before the hearing date through the mobile applications of UYAP (the National Judiciary Informatics System) or through the lawyer or citizen portal (Article 8 of the Regulation). The judge’s decision accepting or rejecting the request is final and cannot be appealed; a legal, practical or technical obstacle making e-Duruşma difficult is a ground for rejection (Article 9 of the Regulation).
• Repeating the statement of acceptance: under the Regulation, “e-Duruşma produces the same legal consequences as a hearing held in the presence of the court” (Article 13/1). However, the Regulation lays down a special rule for a statement that ends the action and does not treat such a statement as sufficient on its own:

Article 13/4 of the Regulation (unofficial translation):
“If a party or attorney attending the hearing through the e-Duruşma System makes a statement of waiver, acceptance or court settlement that ends the action, the court sets a new hearing date, and the waiver, acceptance or court settlement becomes valid if, on the date set, it is repeated before the court and the hearing record is signed by the party who made the statement.”

If the spouse abroad accepts, through e-Duruşma, an action brought by the other spouse, this provision comes into play, and the court may require the statement to be repeated in its presence; this means the spouse would still have to come to Turkey. However, the General Assembly of Civil Chambers has stated that acceptance in an uncontested divorce differs from acceptance in procedural law: “Acceptance of the action under Article 166/3 of the TCC differs from the concept of ‘acceptance’ regulated in Article 308 of the Code of Civil Procedure” (decision of 18 April 2019, cited above). For this reason, how Article 13/4 of the Regulation applies to uncontested divorce, and particularly to an action in which the spouses apply together, has not been settled by the sources.

Timing also calls for caution. The General Assembly decision emphasizing “at the same time and at the hearing” dates from 2019; Article 149 of the CCP, by contrast, was amended together with its heading by Law No. 7251 in 2020, and its paragraph 4 was added by Law No. 7589 and entered into force on 31 October 2026. Because there is no Court of Cassation decision treating a statement taken through SEGBİS or e-Duruşma as either sufficient or insufficient, the safe route is for the spouse to attend the uncontested divorce hearing in person.

c) Can a Statement Be Given Through Letters Rogatory or a Consulate?

No. The 2nd Civil Chamber reversed a judgment based on a statement taken through letters rogatory (talimat, a request to another court, in Turkey or abroad, to take the statement), holding that “granting an uncontested divorce (TCC Art. 166/3) by taking the defendant’s statement through letters rogatory, without the defendant being heard in person by the judge of the court, is contrary to procedure and law” (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 17 October 2012, Case No. 2012/7307, Decision No. 2012/24871, unanimously). In the same decision, the Chamber stated that if the parties are not present and do not declare in person that they have agreed, whether the marital union has irretrievably broken down must be assessed on the evidence, under Article 166/1 of the TCC. The decision does not say whether the letters rogatory were executed in Turkey or abroad; the Chamber’s test is whether the judge of the court hearing the case heard the spouse in person.

Letters rogatory to another court (istinabe; Article 197/2 of the CCP) and the 1970 Hague Evidence Convention (which calls such a request a “Letter of Request”), in force for Turkey since 12 October 2004, serve to take evidence located elsewhere; the Court of Cassation has not accepted letters rogatory as sufficient for the uncontested divorce statement. No Court of Cassation decision has been found that separately addresses taking the statement through a consulate; however, a statement taken by a consular officer does not amount to the judge hearing the case hearing the spouse either.

If the Spouse Cannot Come to Turkey, Which Route Should Be Chosen?

If the spouse cannot come to Turkey, the safe routes are a contested divorce or a divorce in the country where the spouse lives; the safe route to an uncontested divorce is for the spouse to attend the hearing at which the conditions will be completed. Whether the spouse can come should be settled before the action is filed. The options and their trade-offs are as follows:

Registration in the civil registry has effect only as regards the marriage bond. The General Assembly of Civil Chambers held that, since the registration commission’s decision “does not produce effects as regards the provisions of the foreign court judgment that are subject to enforcement, such as custody, child support, personal contact with the child, the matrimonial property regime and compensation, the judgment’s producing effects in these respects depends on its recognition or enforcement under the provisions of Law No. 5718” (Court of Cassation, General Assembly of Civil Chambers, 29 November 2023, Case No. 2022/1205, Decision No. 2023/1188, by majority vote). The registration and recognition of a divorce judgment obtained abroad are explained in our article on recognition and registration of a divorce judgment obtained abroad (in Turkish).

When an uncontested divorce is not possible, the action proceeds as a contested divorce action (in Turkish) based on the irretrievable breakdown of the marital union. On this route, the spouses’ agreement is not enough: the judge cannot treat the facts on which the divorce action is based as proven unless convinced in good conscience of their existence, and the parties’ admissions do not bind the judge (Article 184 of the TCC).

When an action filed as an uncontested divorce turns into a contested divorce, the exchange of written pleadings must be completed. The 2nd Civil Chamber reversed a judgment, stating that “continuing the proceedings and dismissing the main action without duly granting a time limit and without completing the exchange of written pleadings is a serious procedural error affecting the parties’ rights of defense and proof” (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 4 November 2024, Case No. 2024/1117, Decision No. 2024/8212). When a peremptory time limit is duly granted, however, missing it has serious consequences: in one case, the first-instance court dismissed the action on procedural grounds after no petition was filed within the two-week peremptory time limit it had granted for a contested divorce statement of claim; the Regional Court of Appeal found this decision correct, and the 2nd Civil Chamber upheld it with its standard upholding formula (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 22 May 2024, Case No. 2023/7145, Decision No. 2024/3727).

If the power of attorney also authorizes the waiver of legal remedies, the attorneys can make the judgment final by waiving appeal after service. In the case of the upholding decision of 14 February 2024 cited above, the parties’ attorneys waived the appeal to the Regional Court of Appeal; the first-instance court accepted that the judgment had become final through this waiver and rejected the defendant spouse’s later appeal application. This is why it matters for the spouse abroad to know which powers they have included in the power of attorney. The factors affecting the length of the contested route are explained in our article on how long divorce cases take in Turkey.

What Happens If the Spouse Does Not Attend the Hearing or Withdraws from the Agreement?

The action does not lapse automatically; the general rules of the CCP apply. However, because the spouse who does not attend is not heard in person, no uncontested divorce judgment can be given. Two different consequences must be distinguished here. Because a party may also pursue their action through an attorney (Article 71 of the CCP), a spouse whose lawyer attends the hearing but who does not attend in person has not left the action unpursued; the only shortcoming is the lack of a personal hearing. The consequences of not pursuing the action arise when the parties or their attorneys fail to attend the hearing despite being duly summoned (Article 150 of the CCP):

• if none of the duly summoned parties attends the hearing, the file is removed from the active docket (işlemden kaldırma);
• if one party attends and the other does not, at the request of the party present, the proceedings continue in the absence of the other party or the file is removed from the active docket;
• a file removed from the active docket may be reinstated (yenileme) within three months by a petition from either party; if it is reinstated after one month, court fees are charged again;
• an action not reinstated within three months is deemed not to have been filed as of the day the period expires;
• a reinstated action is deemed not to have been filed if, after the first reinstatement, it is left unpursued more than once.

Continuing the proceedings in the absence of the spouse who did not attend does not provide the personal hearing required for an uncontested divorce. In that situation, as in the decision of 7 November 2016 cited above, the action can only proceed as a contested divorce under Article 166/1 of the TCC.

Either spouse may withdraw from the agreement until the judgment becomes final. Noting that no statutory provision prevents a spouse from withdrawing their will to agree, the General Assembly of Civil Chambers held that “the parties must be given the opportunity to state their claims and defenses and to submit their evidence, and the action must continue as a ‘contested divorce’ (TCC Art. 166/1-2)” (decision of 18 April 2019, by majority vote). Within the General Assembly, the view was also put forward that, once an uncontested divorce judgment has been given, a spouse may withdraw only by alleging a defect of consent, but the majority did not adopt it. The 2nd Civil Chamber follows the same line, holding that, “since there is no statutory provision preventing the withdrawal of the declaration of will, the uncontested divorce action must in this case be heard as a ‘contested divorce’” (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 22 December 2025, Case No. 2025/9205, Decision No. 2025/11645).

The outcome is similar if the settlement agreement is incomplete or the judge does not find an arrangement appropriate. In a case where personal contact with the common child had not been arranged and had been left to the judge’s discretion, the Court of Cassation required the court to make a proposal to the parties and, if the proposal was not accepted and the parties could not agree, to continue the action as a contested divorce under Article 166/1 of the TCC (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 27 June 2016, Case No. 2016/14906, Decision No. 2016/12382). Since a divorce is granted only if the parties accept the change proposed by the judge, a spouse who is not at the hearing cannot accept such a change there.

Which Court Has Venue, and Which Law Applies?

Under Article 168 of the TCC, the court with venue in divorce is the court of either spouse’s domicile or of the place where the spouses have lived together for the last six months before the action. The applicable law, however, is determined by the spouses’ nationality and common habitual residence, and it may not be Turkish law.

a) Subject-Matter Jurisdiction and Venue

Divorce actions are heard by the Family Court (Aile Mahkemesi) (Article 4 of Law No. 4787 on the Establishment, Duties and Trial Procedures of Family Courts). The international jurisdiction of Turkish courts is determined by the domestic rules on venue (Article 40 of Law No. 5718 on Private International and Procedural Law (MÖHUK)).

For actions concerning the personal status of Turkish citizens only, a further order is provided: if the action has not been or cannot be filed before foreign courts, it is heard by the court with venue in Turkey; failing that, by the court of the place where the person concerned resides; if the person does not reside in Turkey, by the court of their last domicile in Turkey; and failing that, by one of the courts in Ankara, Istanbul or Izmir (Article 41 of MÖHUK).

Venue in divorce is not mandatory (it is not kesin yetki, a venue rule the court must apply of its own motion). In a case where both spouses lived in Belgium and had no registered address in Turkey, but the defendant’s last domicile in Turkey was known, the 5th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, citing Article 41 of MÖHUK and Article 168 of the TCC, noted that the defendant had not raised a proper objection to venue “in this action, in which there is no mandatory venue rule”, and decided that the case should be heard by the court where it was first filed (Court of Cassation, 5th Civil Chamber, 11 March 2024, Case No. 2023/12332, Decision No. 2024/2880). For spouses who are both foreign nationals and have neither a domicile in Turkey nor a place there where they lived together for the last six months, no Turkish court with venue can be identified under Article 168 of the TCC; in that situation, no Court of Cassation decision has been found showing whether the absence of an objection to venue establishes the international jurisdiction of a Turkish court.

b) Applicable Law

Filing the action in Turkey does not mean that Turkish law will apply to it. If the case has a foreign element, the judge determines the applicable law of the court’s own motion:

Article 14 of the Law on Private International and Procedural Law (unofficial translation):
“(1) The grounds and effects of divorce and separation are governed by the common national law of the spouses. If the parties have different nationalities, the law of their common habitual residence applies; failing that, Turkish law applies.
…
(3) Custody and matters relating to custody in divorce are also subject to the first paragraph.
(4) Turkish law applies to requests for interim measures.”

The judge applies these rules and the applicable foreign law of the court’s own motion; if the provisions of the foreign law relevant to the case cannot be established despite all inquiries, Turkish law applies (Article 2 of MÖHUK). The 2nd Civil Chamber reverses judgments that apply Turkish law directly without following this sequence: “it was not correct for the court to render judgment by applying Turkish law directly without addressing these matters” (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 25 October 2022, Case No. 2022/6574, Decision No. 2022/8516). The Chamber reached the same conclusion for spouses who were Syrian nationals (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 25 January 2024, Case No. 2023/3881, Decision No. 2024/494) and for spouses who were Iraqi nationals (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 16 February 2026, Case No. 2025/6736, Decision No. 2026/1694).

The rule works as follows, depending on the spouses’ situation:

• If the spouses are nationals of different states (for example, a Turkish citizen and a foreign spouse), the law of the country of their common habitual residence applies, and if they have no common habitual residence, Turkish law applies. For spouses who were nationals of Egypt and Saudi Arabia and had lived in Turkey since 2012, the 2nd Civil Chamber held that “the parties’ common habitual residence is Turkey, and Turkish law must be applied in the present action” (decision of 21 April 2026, Case No. 2025/5548, cited above, by majority vote).
• If one spouse holds another nationality in addition to Turkish citizenship, Turkish law is taken as the basis for that spouse where the applicable law is determined by nationality (Article 4(b) of MÖHUK).
• If the spouses are nationals of the same state, their common national law applies; for two spouses who are Turkish citizens living abroad, this is Turkish law.

Nationality and habitual residence are determined according to the situation on the date the action is filed, unless otherwise provided (Article 3 of MÖHUK). If the conflict-of-laws rules of the applicable foreign law designate another law, this reference (renvoi) is taken into account in family law disputes (Article 2/3 of MÖHUK). For stateless persons and refugees, domicile, or failing that habitual residence, is used instead of nationality (Article 4(a) of MÖHUK). The sequence above is therefore a starting point; in a specific case, these rules may also affect the outcome.

A provision of the applicable foreign law is not applied if it is manifestly contrary to Turkish public policy; where deemed necessary, Turkish law applies (Article 5 of MÖHUK). Regarding a foreign divorce provision that did not grant equal rights to women and men, the Court of Cassation held that “a legal provision of a foreign state constitutes a manifest violation of Turkish public policy” (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 30 May 2022, Case No. 2022/3764, Decision No. 2022/5114).

It is unclear what happens if the applicable foreign law does not recognize uncontested divorce. Article 14 of MÖHUK subjects the grounds and effects of divorce to the applicable law, foreign law is applied of the court’s own motion, and only a provision manifestly contrary to Turkish public policy is excluded. No Court of Cassation decision has been found answering whether the absence of an uncontested divorce route counts as a violation of public policy in this sense. In that situation, the content of the applicable law should be researched before the action is filed.

If a common child lives abroad, international conventions must also be considered; MÖHUK applies without prejudice to the international conventions to which Turkey is a party (Article 1 of MÖHUK). Under the 1996 Hague Child Protection Convention, to which Turkey has been a party since 1 February 2017, the authorities of the state of the child’s habitual residence have jurisdiction, as a rule, to take measures for the protection of the child (Article 5 of the Convention). A Turkish court hearing the divorce action of spouses whose child lives in another contracting state may, however, take measures for the protection of the child if its own law so provides, if at the time the action is filed one of the parents has their habitual residence in Turkey and one of them has custody, if the parents and any other person with parental responsibility for the child have accepted this jurisdiction, and if this is in the child’s best interests (Article 10). This jurisdiction ends when the divorce judgment becomes final; in exercising it, the court applies its own law (Article 15). As for child support (iştirak nafakası), under the 1973 Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Maintenance Obligations, in force for Turkey since 1 November 1983, the law of the habitual residence of the maintenance creditor, that is, the child, applies as a rule (Article 4 of the Convention); if maintenance cannot be obtained under that law, the common national law applies, and if that does not produce a result either, the internal law of the authority seised applies (Articles 5 and 6). Turkey has also made the reservation under Article 15, which allows Turkish internal law to apply if the creditor and the debtor are both Turkish citizens and the debtor has their habitual residence in Turkey. No Court of Cassation decision applying these provisions in a divorce action has been found; if the child lives abroad, this aspect should be examined separately before the settlement agreement is drafted.

In Which Language Should the Settlement Agreement Be Drafted, and Is an Interpreter Needed?

No provision has been found governing the language in which the settlement agreement must be drafted; the test is whether the judge is satisfied that the spouses have expressed their will freely (Article 166/3 of the TCC). If the agreement is drafted solely in a foreign language, the party relying on it must also submit a Turkish translation to the court; the court may, of its own motion or at the other party’s request, require an official translation (Article 223 of the CCP). In a bilingual agreement, the Turkish text must be complete and the two texts must match.

The agreement is signed by the spouses themselves; what the Court of Cassation requires is “an agreement bearing the signatures of the parties themselves” (decision of 27 May 2024, cited above). The General Assembly of Civil Chambers accepted that the arrangement may also be made orally at the hearing instead of in a written agreement, but it added a condition: “The parties may submit a settlement agreement to the court on this matter, or they may also make oral statements to the court on all of these matters. In the second case, however, the oral statement must be entered in the record and signed by the parties” (decision of 18 April 2019). The content of the agreement is explained separately in our article on how to draft a divorce settlement agreement.

For a spouse who does not know Turkish, understanding both the agreement and the judge’s questions at the hearing is a precondition for the judge to be satisfied, as the law requires, that the will was expressed freely. The law contains provisions showing that an interpreter may be present at the hearing: alongside the parties and attorneys present, the hearing record must state “the first names and surnames of the interpreter” (Article 154/3(b) of the CCP). For witnesses there is also a specific rule: “If the witness does not know Turkish, the witness is heard through an interpreter” (Article 263/1 of the CCP). For a person carrying out a transaction before a notary in Turkey, the Notaries Law (Noterlik Kanunu) likewise provides: “If the person concerned does not know Turkish, a sworn interpreter is also to be present” (Article 74 of the Notaries Law No. 1512).

The law does not make it a legal requirement for a translation of the agreement into a language the spouse understands to be prepared and signed by the spouses. Nevertheless, this makes it easier to show that the foreign spouse knew what they were agreeing to and expressed their will freely, and it is therefore recommended.

If there is a common child, the agreement also covers custody, personal contact and child support. When granting the divorce, the court, after hearing the mother and father wherever possible, regulates the rights of the parents and their personal contact with the child (Article 182 of the TCC). Details are in our articles on custody in uncontested divorce (in Turkish), personal contact with a common child (in Turkish) and child support (in Turkish).

Which Documents Should Be Prepared?

Preferably, a settlement agreement signed by the spouses themselves is prepared, together with a power of attorney bearing the grantor’s photograph and stating the powers expressly, the marriage certificate and identity information. Documents issued by foreign authorities require an apostille or consular authentication unless a convention or legislation exempts them from authentication; a power of attorney executed at a Turkish consulate does not need this certification. A checklist is given in section c.

a) Power of Attorney and Apostille

Even if the spouse will attend the hearing, they may give a lawyer a power of attorney to file and pursue the action. The lawyer submits to the file the original of the power of attorney certified or drawn up by a notary, or a copy certified by the lawyer (Article 76 of the CCP). The attorney cannot perform acts such as accepting the action or waiving legal remedies unless those powers are expressly stated in the power of attorney (Article 74 of the CCP). A photograph of the person concerned must be affixed to powers of attorney drawn up for divorce actions (Article 93 of the Noterlik Kanunu Yönetmeliği, the Regulation on the Notaries Law, unofficial translation); since consulates perform notarial services abroad, the spouse should also bring a photograph to the consulate. Abroad, a power of attorney can be given in two ways:

• At a Turkish consulate: “In foreign countries, notarial services are performed by consuls” (Article 191 of the Notaries Law).
• Before a foreign notary: for an official document prepared by the authorities of a foreign state to have that status in Turkey, it must be certified by the competent authority of the issuing state or by the relevant Turkish consulate, subject to the conventions to which Turkey is a party (Article 224 of the CCP). The consul certifies the signature and seal of the competent authority at the foot of a notarial act made in a foreign country (Article 195 of the Notaries Law).

The route that replaces this certification is the apostille (apostil şerhi). The 1961 Hague Apostille Convention has been in force for Turkey since 29 September 1985. The Convention applies to public documents executed in one contracting state and to be used in another, and notarial acts are among these documents; the only formality that may be required for these documents is the apostille issued by the competent authority of the state where the document was executed (Articles 1-3 of the Convention). If the legislation of the state where the document is to be used, or an agreement between states, has abolished or simplified this formality or exempted the document from authentication, an apostille cannot be required either (Article 3/2); the type of document and the agreement in force with the country concerned should therefore be checked first. If the country where the spouse is located is not a party to the Convention, the consular certification route under Article 224 of the CCP remains.

b) Marriage and Identity Documents

The marriage of foreign spouses may not be recorded in the Turkish civil registry. For spouses with no connection to Turkish citizenship, the 2nd Civil Chamber held that “it cannot be expected that this information is recorded in our country’s civil registry” and treated documentation of identity and marriage as sufficient (decision of 21 April 2026, Case No. 2025/5548, cited above, by majority vote). If there is no marriage certificate in the file, the court investigates this before turning to the merits. In a case involving spouses of different nationalities where there was no document showing that they were married, the Chamber reversed the judgment, stating that the plaintiff should be “given a time limit to submit an official document, obtained from the consulate of the country of which the plaintiff is a national, showing that they are married to the defendant” and that, if necessary, the relevant embassy should be asked through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 26 November 2025, Case No. 2025/3292, Decision No. 2025/10294).

A marriage concluded by a Turkish citizen abroad before a foreign authority is valid if it complies with the Turkish Civil Code and there is no ground requiring nullity. The marriage must be reported within thirty days at the latest by submitting the document obtained from the authority that performed it to the Turkish diplomatic mission there; if there is no diplomatic mission, the document may be submitted to the civil registry office after being translated into Turkish, duly certified and authenticated by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Article 24 of the Civil Registry Services Law). Failure to report does not affect the existence of the marriage. In an action between foreign spouses who were refugees, the 2nd Civil Chamber held that “For a divorce action, the existence of a valid marriage is sufficient; the existence of a record of the marriage is not required” (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 24 January 2013, Case No. 2012/13194, Decision No. 2013/1781, unanimously). Regarding a Turkish citizen who married in Germany and whose marriage was not registered in the Turkish civil registry, the Chamber also stated that the lack of registration does not invalidate the marriage; this decision was given not in a divorce action but in an action for recognition of a foreign divorce judgment, and by majority vote (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 17 March 2008, Case No. 2007/6488, Decision No. 2008/3494).

For spouses recorded in the Turkish civil registry, a divorce judgment must contain the parties’ Turkish identity numbers, first names, surnames, places and dates of birth, mothers’ and fathers’ names, the place where they are recorded in the family register and the identity information of the children born during the marriage (Article 27 of the Civil Registry Services Law). The identity of a foreign spouse who is not recorded in the Turkish civil registry is shown by documents of the state of which they are a national (decision of 21 April 2026, Case No. 2025/5548, cited above).

c) Checklist for the Spouse Abroad

Must a Foreign Plaintiff or a Plaintiff Living Abroad Provide Security for Costs?

A foreign national who brings an action before a Turkish court, and a Turkish citizen without habitual residence in Turkey, must as a rule provide security for the other party’s costs (teminat); no security is required if there is reciprocity, an international convention or one of the exemptions in the CCP. Whether security is required in an action where the spouses apply together has not been settled by the sources; no decision showing this has been found.

Article 48 of the Law on Private International and Procedural Law (unofficial translation):
“(1) Foreign natural and legal persons who bring an action, intervene in an action or initiate enforcement proceedings before a Turkish court must provide the security determined by the court to cover the costs of the proceedings and of enforcement and the losses and damages of the opposing party.
(2) The court exempts the person bringing the action, intervening in the action or initiating enforcement proceedings from security on the basis of reciprocity.”

Security is not limited to foreign nationals. The CCP also requires security covering the defendant’s probable litigation costs where “a Turkish citizen who does not have habitual residence in Turkey brings an action” (Article 84/1(a) of the CCP). For a plaintiff who is a Turkish citizen living abroad, this provision should not be overlooked. Both provisions place the security on the party bringing the action: if the spouse who is a Turkish citizen with habitual residence in Turkey brings the action and the spouse abroad or the foreign spouse accepts it (Article 166/3 of the TCC), neither provision is triggered. If the plaintiff living in Turkey is a foreign national, Article 48 of MÖHUK still applies. The other grounds in Article 84 of the CCP (such as an inability to pay evidenced by the plaintiff’s bankruptcy or a certificate of insolvency) remain applicable.

The main grounds for exemption from security are:

• Reciprocity: if there is reciprocity between the foreign plaintiff’s state and Turkey, the court exempts the plaintiff from security (Article 48/2 of MÖHUK).
• The 1954 Hague Convention on Civil Procedure: under Article 17 of the Convention, in force for Turkey since 11 July 1973, no security may be required, by reason of foreign nationality or lack of domicile, from a plaintiff who is a national of one of the contracting states and has their domicile in one of the contracting states.
• Bilateral judicial assistance agreements: a bilateral agreement between Turkey and the spouse’s state may also provide for exemption from security. In cross-actions for divorce, the 2nd Civil Chamber upheld the judgment, noting that under the agreement between Turkey and Turkmenistan on legal assistance in civil and criminal matters, the plaintiff wife “could not be required to provide a security deposit” (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 2 April 2015, Case No. 2014/20692, Decision No. 2015/6394, unanimously).
• Security under Article 84 of the CCP: no security may be required if the plaintiff receives legal aid or has immovable property or a claim secured by a real right in Turkey sufficient to cover the security (Article 85 of the CCP). These exemptions are provided for the security under the CCP; for the security required of a foreign plaintiff under Article 48 of MÖHUK, exemption is determined by the reciprocity and convention rules above.
• Refugees: the Court of Cassation stated that, under the 1951 Geneva Convention, refugees are treated like nationals in access to the courts, including exemption from security for costs (decision of 30 May 2022, cited above).

The decision that explains in detail how security is applied, however, concerns not divorce but a compensation dispute arising from a traffic accident, and it was given by majority vote. In that decision, the 4th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation held that “the court must consider the required security of its own motion”; it required that the question of exemption be referred to the Ministry of Justice’s directorate general for foreign relations and the European Union (Dış İlişkiler ve Avrupa Birliği Genel Müdürlüğü), that a peremptory time limit be granted if security is required, and that the claim be dismissed on procedural grounds if the security is not provided (Court of Cassation, 4th Civil Chamber, 12 February 2025, Case No. 2023/4639, Decision No. 2025/2286).

A person who cannot afford the litigation costs may request legal aid (Article 334 of the CCP); for foreign nationals, eligibility for legal aid is additionally subject to reciprocity. The 1954 Hague Convention also grants nationals of contracting states legal aid on the same basis as nationals (Article 20 of the Convention).

How Is the Action Filed, and How Are Documents Served on the Spouse Abroad?

The action begins either with a joint application by the spouses or with one spouse filing and the other accepting the action (Article 166/3 of the TCC); service on the spouse abroad is made through the competent authority of that country. Preparing the petition and filing the action are covered in our article on how to file a divorce case in Turkey, applying without a lawyer in our article on uncontested divorce without a lawyer (in Turkish), and fees and costs in our article on attorney’s fees and court costs in divorce cases (in Turkish).

If case documents or a hearing summons are to be served on the spouse abroad, service in a foreign country is made through the competent authority of that country; the documents are sent through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or directly to the Turkish Embassy or Consulate General (Article 25 of the Notification Law No. 7201). If the addressee is a Turkish citizen, service may also be made through the Turkish Embassy or Consulate; if the addressee does not apply within thirty days of service of the notice, service is deemed made at the end of the thirtieth day (Article 25/a of the Notification Law). This route does not apply to a foreign spouse.

Documents to be served abroad are translated into the language of the addressee’s country or into the language determined by agreements (Article 40 of the Tebligat Kanununun Uygulanmasına Dair Yönetmelik, the Regulation on the Implementation of the Notification Law, unofficial translation). Payment of the advance on costs that the plaintiff must pay is a condition of the action; the court grants a peremptory time limit to cure any shortfall, and if it is not cured within that time, the action is dismissed on procedural grounds (Article 114 of the CCP; Article 115 of the CCP). The 2nd Civil Chamber explained this rule in a divorce action whose defendant was abroad, but reversed the dismissal on procedural grounds because the peremptory time limit had been granted before the CCP entered into force (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 21 March 2019, Case No. 2019/1377, Decision No. 2019/3186).

If the spouse abroad has an attorney representing them in the proceedings in Turkey, service is made on the attorney (Article 11 of the Notification Law); the time limit for appeal to the Regional Court of Appeal also starts to run when the reasoned judgment is served on the attorney (Article 345 of the CCP). This does not change the requirement that the spouse attend the uncontested divorce hearing in person.

Turkey has also been a party to the 1965 Hague Service Convention since 28 April 1972. According to Turkey’s declaration, diplomatic or consular agents of foreign states may serve documents in Turkey only on their own nationals; Turkey has also objected to the methods of service in Article 10 of the Convention, such as service by direct mail. These declarations concern service to be effected in Turkey: the Convention allows a state to object to such service within its own territory (Article 8/2 and Article 10). For documents sent from Turkey to the spouse abroad, what matters is whether the state where the spouse is located is a party to the Convention and what declarations that state has made; the route to follow therefore varies by country.

After the Judgment: Finality, Civil Registry and Recognition Abroad

Once the divorce judgment becomes final, it is entered in the civil registry; whether it is valid in the spouse’s country depends on that country’s law.

The time limit for appeal to the Regional Court of Appeal (istinaf) is two weeks and starts to run when the judgment is duly served on each party (Article 345 of the CCP). The parties cannot waive the right of appeal before the judgment is served on them (Article 349 of the CCP); an attorney can waive legal remedies only if expressly authorized (Article 74 of the CCP). The fact that the judgment has become final is written at the bottom or on the back of the judgment; for judgments that become final after review on appeal, the annotation of finality (kesinleşme kaydı) and the necessary notifications are also made by the first-instance court (Article 302 of the CCP). The court’s chief clerk notifies the civil registry office of a judgment that requires registration in the family register within ten days of the date it became final (Article 55 of the Civil Registry Services Law). How to follow up on finality is explained in our article on making an uncontested divorce judgment final (in Turkish).

Whether a Turkish court’s divorce judgment takes effect in the foreign spouse’s country, or in the country where the spouses live, depends on that country’s law and must be researched separately for each country. Turkey is not a party to the 1970 Hague Convention on the Recognition of Divorces and Legal Separations. Between Austria and Turkey, however, CIEC Convention No. 11 of 8 September 1967 on the recognition of decisions relating to the marriage bond is in force (CIEC is the International Commission on Civil Status); the Convention provides for a divorce judgment given in one contracting state to be recognized in the other contracting state subject to certain conditions. The Netherlands was a party to this Convention but withdrew from it with effect from 13 September 2001.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a Turkish citizen married to a foreign national obtain an uncontested divorce in Turkey?

Yes, a divorce action can be filed before a Turkish court; for an uncontested divorce, both spouses must be heard in person by the judge at the hearing. The applicable law is determined under Article 14 of MÖHUK: if the spouses’ common habitual residence is in a foreign country, the grounds and effects of the divorce are governed by that country’s law.

If the spouse gives a power of attorney at a consulate, can there be an uncontested divorce without the spouse attending the hearing?

No. A power of attorney given at a consulate authorizes a lawyer to file and pursue the action, but it does not satisfy the requirement that the judge hear the spouse in person. If the spouse does not attend, the action proceeds as a contested divorce.

If the spouse gives a statement before a court or a consulate in the country where they live, can there be an uncontested divorce?

No. The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation reversed an uncontested divorce judgment granted on a statement taken through letters rogatory (decision of 17 October 2012). The test is whether the judge hearing the case hears the spouse in person. No decision has been found that separately addresses the consular route; a statement taken by a consular officer does not amount to a hearing by the judge either.

Can the spouse abroad attend the hearing through SEGBİS?

The court may allow participation by video link, but this route is not safe for an uncontested divorce. The decision is at the court’s discretion, the e-Duruşma Regulation does not expressly list a place abroad as a place of participation, and the court may require a statement of acceptance made through e-Duruşma to be repeated in its presence. No Court of Cassation decision has been found treating a statement taken this way as sufficient.

Does the action lapse if the spouse does not attend the hearing?

No, not automatically. If the spouse’s lawyer attends the hearing, the action is not left unpursued; the spouse is simply not heard in person. If neither the parties nor their attorneys attend, the file is removed from the active docket; if it is not reinstated within three months, or if it is left unpursued more than once after reinstatement, the action is deemed not to have been filed. If one party attends, the proceedings may continue in the absence of the other, but no uncontested divorce judgment can be given.

Must the settlement agreement be bilingual?

No provision making this mandatory has been found. However, because the judge must be satisfied that the spouses have expressed their will freely, it is recommended that a translation of the agreement in a language the foreign spouse understands also be signed. A spouse who does not know Turkish should also be heard at the hearing through an interpreter, because the judge cannot be satisfied that a spouse who does not understand the judge’s questions has expressed their will freely. If the agreement is drafted solely in a foreign language, a Turkish translation must also be submitted to the court (Article 223 of the CCP).

Does a foreign spouse who files the action have to provide security for costs?

As a rule, yes; the court determines the security (Article 48 of MÖHUK). No security is required if there is reciprocity, the 1954 Hague Convention on Civil Procedure or a bilateral judicial assistance agreement. Security may also be required from a plaintiff who is a Turkish citizen without habitual residence in Turkey (Article 84 of the CCP; exemptions such as legal aid are in Article 85 of the CCP); if the action is brought by the spouse who is a Turkish citizen living in Turkey, neither ground arises. Whether security is required in an action where the spouses apply together is not certain.

Is a spouse holding a Blue Card (Mavi Kart) treated as a foreign national in a divorce action?

A Blue Card holder is not a Turkish citizen; however, persons who were Turkish citizens by birth and lost their citizenship by obtaining permission to renounce it continue to enjoy the rights granted to Turkish citizens, apart from the exceptions in the law (Article 28 of the Turkish Citizenship Law No. 5901). In the case of spouses in this situation living in Germany, the 2nd Civil Chamber reversed a decision declining jurisdiction in favor of the German courts and stated that the parties cannot be treated as foreign nationals in a divorce action (Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber, 19 April 2016, Case No. 2015/24523, Decision No. 2016/7966). The decision concerns the court’s jurisdiction and was given under the text as amended by Law No. 6304, which was in force on the date of the action; other questions, such as the applicable law, are assessed separately.

Is a Turkish court’s divorce judgment also valid in the spouse’s country?

That depends on the law of that country. Turkey is not a party to the 1970 Hague Convention on the Recognition of Divorces; between Austria and Turkey, however, CIEC Convention No. 11 applies. For other countries, separate research is needed.

What should spouses who divorced abroad do in Turkey?

First, the foreign judgment must be recognized or registered in the civil registry in Turkey. The routes by which a divorce judgment obtained before a foreign court takes effect in Turkey are explained in our articles on recognition and registration of a divorce judgment obtained abroad (in Turkish) and recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in Turkey.