PROOF METHODS AND EVIDENCE IN INHERITANCE EQUALIZATION CASES

1. Introduction

Inheritance law is one of the branches of law where intra-family relationships are most prone to conflict. Transfers made by the testator to their children or other descendants during their lifetime often give rise to disputes in the distribution of the inheritance after death. In particular, within the framework of the equalization institution, which transfers are subject to equalization, how their value is determined, and whether there was an intention to exempt them from equalization are of great importance.

Article 669 of the Turkish Civil Code regulates equalization, while the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 sets forth fundamental provisions regarding the burden of proof and the use of evidence. However, in practice, many problems arise concerning proof. These problems stem from insufficient evidence, loss of documents, uncertainty regarding donations made many years ago, and differing interpretations by the parties.

This article will examine the issue of proof in inheritance equalization cases in its broadest sense; types of evidence, burden of proof, problems encountered in practice, debates in legal doctrine, and proposed solutions will be discussed in detail.

2. Inheritance Equalization Institution

2.1. Conceptual Framework

Equalization is the process of taking into account inter vivos transfers made by the testator to their descendants during their lifetime when distributing the inheritance. The primary aim here is to maintain equality among the heirs.

2.2. Legal Basis

• Turkish Civil Code Article 669: Inter vivos transfers to descendants are, as a rule, subject to equalization.

• Turkish Civil Code Article 670: Ordinary education and marriage expenses are not included in the equalization calculation.

• Turkish Civil Code Article 671: Regulates how the equalization account is to be calculated.

2.3. Nature of the Equalization Case

• It creates a special debt relationship among the heirs .

• An heir is obligated to deduct any received benefit from their inheritance share.

• Other heirs can demand that this obligation be fulfilled by filing a lawsuit.

3. Fundamental Principles of Evidence Law

3.1. Burden of Proof (Code of Civil Procedure, Article 190)

• Each party bears the burden of proving the facts on which its claim is based.

• In a compensation lawsuit:

  • The party claiming that the benefit was provided must prove it.

  • The party claiming that the contribution is exempt from equalization must prove its intention to grant the exemption.

3.2. Freedom of Evidence

The Turkish Code of Civil Procedure allows parties to present many types of evidence: written documents, witnesses, expert reports, on-site inspections, expert opinions, etc.

3.3. Standards of Proof

• In legal cases, "the judge's conscientious conviction" is paramount.

• The evidence is evaluated as a whole.

4. Types of Evidence That Can Be Used in a Settlement Case

4.1. Written Documents

It is the strongest type of evidence.

• Land Registry Records: These are the primary evidence in proving the donation of immovable property.

• Bank Records: Wire transfers, EFTs, receipts, account activity.

• Notarized Documents: Donation deed, consent form, inheritance agreement.

• Official Documents: Tax records, official fee receipts.

• Will: The testator's wishes regarding exemptions may be written here.

4.2. Witness Evidence

• It is resorted to if there is no written evidence.

• Family members, relatives, and neighbors may be witnesses.

• However, the impartiality of witnesses is frequently questioned.

4.3. Expert Examination

• This is important for determining the value of the donated item.

• Especially in the case of real estate, the market value at the time of donation is determined through expert reports.

4.4. Exploration

• The court may conduct an on-site inspection to determine the value of the real estate or the property subject to donation.

4.5. Expert Opinion

• Expert reports can be obtained on technical matters such as banking and company valuation.

5. Proof of the Will to be Exempt from Equalization

5.1. Written Exemption Declaration

• It's the most reliable way.

• Annotations can be written on title deeds, donation agreements, or wills.

5.2. Oral Statement

• Although legally possible, it is weak in terms of proof.

• It is often attempted to be supported by witness testimonies.

5.3. Vague Statements

• Vague statements like "Do not count this one among his other siblings" are insufficient as proof.

6. Problems with Proof Encountered in Practice

6.1. Uncertainty Regarding Old Donations

• It is difficult to prove donations made 20-30 years ago.

• Land registry records can be lost, and bank records may not be retrieved from the archives.

6.2. Fraudulent Transactions

• Donations can be presented as sales.

• In this case, a lawsuit for "fraudulent transfer of inheritance" is filed.

6.3. Cash and Jewelry Donations

• Jewelry given as gifts at weddings and cash donations are among the most difficult things to prove.

6.4. Unequal Education and Marriage Costs

• While normal education costs are not subject to equalization, excessive luxury spending sparks controversy.

7. Controversial Issues in Doctrine

7.1. Method of Proving Exemption

• Is written documentation mandatory, or is a witness sufficient?

• There are differing opinions in the doctrine.

7.2. Valuation Time

• Should the value of the donation at the time it was made or the value at the time the inheritance was opened be taken as the basis?

• The prevailing opinion is that the market value at the time the inheritance is opened should be taken as the basis.

7.3. Combined Evaluation of Evidence

• Relying on a single piece of evidence is often insufficient.

• Written documents, witness testimonies, and expert reports must be evaluated together.

8. Distribution of the Burden of Proof

• Claiming the existence of a donation → proves the donation.

• The party asserting the intention to request exemption → proves the exemption.

• Claiming that winning is a normal gift → proves its normalcy.

This distribution directly affects the outcome of the case.

9. Proof in Comparative Law

• Swiss Law: The burden of proof for a claim of equalization rests with the party making the claim.

• German Law: There is a system for reporting donations; proof is easier.

• French Law: In "Rapport à la succession" cases, written documents and notarized records are the primary means of proof.

10. Proposed Solutions

1. Written documentation should be made mandatory

   • Written documentation is required for high-value donations.

2. Digital Archive of Land Registry and Bank Records

   • Digital archiving should be made mandatory to prevent the loss of old records.

3. Strengthening the Institution of Expert Witnesses

   • The expertise of expert witnesses in equalization cases should be improved.

4. Notarized Documents for Family Matters

   • The testator should be encouraged to have their intention to waive their rights recorded through a notary when making a donation.

11. Conclusion

Inheritance equalization lawsuits are among the most difficult lawsuits to prove.

• Written documents are the strongest evidence.

• Witness and expert reports play a complementary role.

• The intention to grant an exemption must be stated clearly and specifically.

• Proper distribution of the burden of proof ensures fair and swift resolution of cases.

In conclusion, both legislative regulations and enforcement mechanisms need to be strengthened to reduce problems related to evidence.