BREAKUP OF ENGAGEMENT AND COMPENSATION

Entrance

Engagement, according to the Turkish Civil Code (TMK) , is a legal pre-marital relationship established by a "promise to marry" ( TMK Articles 118–123 ).

While not subject to any specific form, there is no contractual requirement. However, claims arising from the dissolution of an engagement are grouped under three headings in the law: material compensation (Turkish Civil Code, Article 120), moral compensation (Turkish Civil Code, Article 121), and the return of gifts (Turkish Civil Code, Article 122).

The statute of limitations is stipulated as one year in Article 123 of the Turkish Civil Code

---

1. Material Compensation (Turkish Civil Code Article 120): Expenses incurred "for the purpose of marriage"

According to Article 120 of the Turkish Civil Code; if an engagement is broken without just cause or terminated due to a reason attributable to one of the parties , the culpable party shall pay the other party (in certain cases, their parents/third parties) appropriate compensation for the expenses incurred and material sacrifices made for the purpose of marriage, in accordance with the principles of good faith.

Terms

• A valid engagement relationship

• Fault/Unjustified Termination (The engagement being broken off without just cause or due to a reason attributable to one of the parties)

• Damage

• Causal link (the expenditure being made for wedding preparations and engagement)

Scope

Monetary compensation covers not all damages caused by the trusted engagement , but also the expenses and sacrifices made due to wedding preparations . Therefore, a causal link between the " expectation of marriage " and the damages is sought.

Engagement preparations that may be subject to monetary compensation

• Wedding preparations
• The price paid for the wedding hall
• Honeymoon preparations
• Furniture and appliance costs

Who can request it?

Not only engaged parties, but also parents and those acting as their guardians can, under the same conditions , claim reimbursement for wedding preparation expenses incurred for the engaged parties (e.g., purchasing household goods). However, these individuals cannot claim reimbursement for expenses incurred for their own personal needs (clothing, travel, etc.).

---

2. Non-pecuniary damages (Turkish Civil Code Article 121): Criterion of violation of personality rights

To claim moral damages,an attack on personal rights is required. It must be proven that the abandoned fiancé's honor has been damagedor they have been humiliated in public .

Examples: Separation without justifiable cause shortly before the wedding date, infidelity, serious insult/slander, public and unjustified breaking of the engagement leading to loss of reputation in the community, etc. (depending on the specific circumstances).

---

3. Return of Gifts (Turkish Civil Code Article 122): Unusual gifts, regardless of fault

If an engagement ends for a reason other than marriage (such as annulment, death, or disappearance), any unusual gifts given by the parties to each other and by the parents (or those acting as parents) shall be returned in kind ; if this is not possible, they shall be returned in equivalent value . Fault is not considered . If return in kind/in equivalent value is impossible, the provisions regarding unjust enrichment apply.

The distinction between customary and unusual: Ordinary gifts that are worn/used are generally not returned; gold and jewelry, and telephones are in most cases considered "unusual" and are therefore eligible for return.

Note: There is no requirement for defects in gifts. The return of gifts is relevant regardless of the reason for the broken engagement; this distinguishes it from compensation for material or moral damages.

---

4. Statute of Limitations (Turkish Civil Code Article 123)

All legal rights arising from the dissolution of an engagement (including claims for monetary and moral damages, and the return of gifts) are subject to a one-year statute of limitations from the date of the termination of the engagement. The period begins to run from the date the engagement actually ends.

---

5. Examples from Supreme Court Case Law

• Supreme Court 3rd Civil Chamber, Case No. 2016/11421, Decision No. 2018/1662

"The breaking off of an engagement without giving a reason is not sufficient grounds for awarding compensation for moral damages."

• Supreme Court 3rd Civil Chamber, 17.03.2015, Case No. 2014/18045 E., Decision No. 2015/4348 K.

“The fact that the gifts were given and not returned can be proven by any kind of evidence. The defendant, who claims that the gifts he acknowledges were given to him due to the engagement were returned, must prove this. However, the burden of proof that the gifts that the defendant denies receiving were given undoubtedly rests with the plaintiff.”

• If one of the fiancés breaks off the engagement without justifiable cause, or if the engagement is broken due to a reason attributable to one of the parties, the at-fault party is obligated to compensate the other party appropriately for the expenses incurred and material sacrifices made for the purpose of marriage, in accordance with the principles of good faith. The same rule applies to engagement expenses (Turkish Civil Code, Article 120). The compensation that the plaintiff may request is negative compensation. In other words, monetary damages that would not have been incurred if the engagement had not occurred can be claimed. The scope of negative compensation is specified in the law, and these include expenses incurred in accordance with the principles of good faith, expenses incurred for the purpose of marriage, and material sacrifices made for the purpose of marriage. For material compensation to be claimed, the engagement must have been broken off without justifiable cause or due to a reason attributable to one of the parties. If the plaintiff proves their claim, appropriate compensation will be awarded. The plaintiff can prove their claim with any kind of evidence… In the concrete case, the plaintiff claimed material damages due to the breaking of the engagement and requested compensation. Although the court partially accepted the plaintiff's claim for material compensation, the plaintiff failed to prove that the engagement was broken as a result of the defendant's culpable behavior… Even if the compensation is accepted, it is necessary to explain in detail what the compensation relates to, along with the amounts and figures. However, the court rendered a decision without having the plaintiff clarify the scope of the material damages.” (Supreme Court 3rd Civil Chamber, March 17, 2015, Case No. 2014/18045, Decision No. 2015/4348)

---

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Q1: Does it matter who broke off the engagement?

• Yes, fault is considered when it comes to compensation for material and moral damages . Fault is not considered in the return of gifts ; it comes into play in all terminations other than marriage.

Q2: Will the gold be returned?

• In practice, gold exceptional and is eligible for return; if this is not possible, a refund in kind/of equivalent value is provided.

S3: What will happen to the items the families bought?

• Families preparing for a wedding ; they cannot claim reimbursement for their own personal expenses.

S4: Does simply feeling sad warrant compensation for emotional distress?

• No. The level of violation of personal rights is what matters; the Supreme Court's approach is that natural grief alone is not sufficient.

S5: How long do I have to file lawsuits?

• The statute of limitations is one year from the date of termination of the engagement (Turkish Civil Code, Article 123).

---

Conclusion

In disputes arising from the dissolution of an engagement, the conditions required for each of Articles 120, 121, and 122 of the Turkish Civil Code must be met, and claims must be correctly characterized and supported by evidence. By establishing an evidence structure and conditions appropriate to the specific case and making the correct claim, it is possible to achieve an effective and proportionate outcome regarding both compensation and the right to restitution.