Eye injury, 10% loss of earning capacity in occupation, and compensation for loss of effort: A comprehensive guide in light of Maritime Labor Law No. 854, Law No. 5510 Article 19, and Supreme Court precedents

Short answer: A seafarer who has suffered a 10% loss in their earning capacity in their profession as a result of a work accident on board qualifies for a permanent incapacity for work benefit from SGK because they fully meet the minimum 10% threshold specified in Article 19 of Law No. 5510. This rate cannot be rejected on the grounds that it is “low”; the law states “at least 10%”. Furthermore, because the seafarer will perform the same job throughout their life by expending more effort due to this disability, they can claim material and moral damages from the employer, even if they continue in the same job after the accident or find a job with a higher salary. In addition, the seafarer also has the possibilities of severance pay if their employment contract ends, and a statutory lien right and provisional attachment (arrest) on the ship to secure their claims.

1. Which Laws Apply in a Work Accident Occurring on Board?

A work accident occurring on a ship is not a matter of a single law, but a multi-layered dispute where five distinct, intertwined branches of law are applied simultaneously. To correctly structure the case, these layers must first be separated:

The scope of Maritime Labor Law No. 854 is determinative.

According to Article 1 of Law No. 854, this Law applies to seafarers working under an employment contract on ships flying the Turkish Flag and having a gross tonnage of one hundred or more, in seas, lakes, and rivers, and their employers. According to the same article, the Law also applies when the total gross tonnage of ships belonging to the same employer is one hundred or more, or when the number of seafarers employed by the employer is 5 or more. You can access the full text of the Law from the official publication of the Ministry of Labor and Social Security: 854 Maritime Labor Law (MoLSS official text).

In practice, the determination of this scope yields the following three results:

Turkish flagged + ship over 100 GRT: The Maritime Labor Law applies; rights such as severance pay, notice period, and annual leave are calculated according to this Law.

Small tonnage ships outside the scope: Since Labor Law No. 4857 excludes maritime transport work, the provisions of the Turkish Code of Obligations regarding service contracts come into play.

Foreign flagged ship: In the practice of the Court of Cassation, since Law No. 854 applies only to work on Turkish flagged ships, the provisions of the Code of Obligations are taken as a basis for the period spent on a foreign flagged ship. In this case, the ITF collective bargaining agreement and P&I club coverage should also be investigated.

Important: The social security aspect is independent of this distinction. As long as the seafarer is considered insured under Law No. 5510, Article 4/1-a, they benefit from the provisions of work accident insurance, regardless of the ship’s tonnage.

2. 10% Threshold: What is the Legal Requirement for Permanent Incapacity Benefit?

The most common misconception in practice is the idea that “10% is a very low rate, nothing can be obtained with it.” This is not true. 10% is the minimum threshold required by law, and this threshold has been fully met.

Article 19 of Law No. 5510 contains the following regulation: Based on reports provided by the health boards of healthcare providers authorized by the Institution due to illness and disability resulting from an occupational accident or occupational disease, an insured person whose earning capacity in the profession is determined by the Institution’s Health Board to have decreased by at least 10% is entitled to permanent incapacity benefit.

How is the income calculated?

In case of permanent full incapacity: The insured person is granted an income at a rate of 70% of their monthly earnings calculated according to Article 17 of Law No. 5510.

In case of permanent partial incapacity (our case): The income to be granted is calculated like a full incapacity income, and the amount corresponding to the degree of incapacity is paid. That is, for a 10% loss: 10% of 70% of the monthly earnings.

If the insured person requires constant care from another person, the income granting rate is applied as 100%.

Start date of the income

As emphasized in the decision of the 10th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals dated 25.10.2023, which is examined in detail below, the insured person’s permanent incapacity benefit:

(A) The date on which the temporary incapacity allowance ends,

(B) If permanent incapacity for work is entered into without temporary incapacity for work being determined, the date of the health committee report related to this

starts from the beginning of the month following. This date is of critical importance not only for the SGK but also for the offset items in the compensation calculation.

Effect of Fault: When permanent incapacity benefit is tied, the insured’s fault status is not taken into account; the only determining criterion is that the disability rate is 10% or higher. In contrast, for temporary incapacity benefit, it is possible to make a reduction based on the fault status, and in a compensation lawsuit to be filed against the employer, the fault rate directly affects the amount of compensation.

3. By Which Boards and How Is the Disability Rate Determined?

How the 10% rate is determined dictates the fate of the file. The process consists of the following steps:

Health committee report of the authorized healthcare provider (hospital authorized by SGK).

Decision of the SGK Institution Health Committee — The rate is determined based on the tables of the Regulation on the Determination of the Rate of Loss of Earning Capacity in Occupation and Working Capacity. You can access the official text of the Regulation here: Regulation on the Determination of the Rate of Loss of Earning Capacity in Occupation and Working Capacity.

Appeal to the High Health Board of Social Insurance — In accordance with Article 95 of Law No. 5510, interested parties have the right to appeal against decisions made by the Institution’s health facilities.

Report of the Council of Forensic Medicine 3rd Specialization Board / university hospital council — High Health Board reports are binding on the Institution; however, they are not binding on other interested parties. Pursuant to the decision of the Grand General Assembly for Unification of Jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation dated 28.06.1976 and numbered 6/4, an examination may be requested from the Presidency of Forensic Medicine or the relevant main scientific branch councils of medical faculties.

Council of Forensic Medicine 2nd Superior Board — In case of a conflict between reports, this conflict must be resolved by the Forensic Medicine Superior Board, and the rate of permanent incapacity to work and its commencement date must be definitively determined.

Critical distinction — “earning capacity in profession” and “physical capacity” are not the same thing. Article 19 of Law No. 5510 considers not the general loss of physical capacity, but the loss of the insured’s earning capacity in their profession. The meaning of an eye defect for a seafarer is very different from its meaning for an office worker. Therefore, in appeals and petitions, the impact of the defect on the maritime profession must be presented separately and concretely.

4. Special Significance of Eye Injury for Seafarers

Eye injuries occurring on board — foreign object penetration, chemical splash, grinding/welding sparks, rope breakage — may appear “partial” on paper, but from the perspective of the maritime profession, they can lead to complete incapacitation from the profession . The reason for this is that the vision standards required for a seafarer’s health certificate are extremely strict.

In summary, according to the Seafarers’ Health Directive published by the T.R. Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, Directorate General of Maritime Affairs:

Regardless of the vision degree of the other eye, persons in the deck and engine classes whose vision in one eye is zero will not be issued a “Seafarer’s Health Certificate”.

In progressive diseases that may gradually reduce vision over time, a certificate will not be issued, even if the vision condition meets the requirements of the distant vision chart.

Distant vision, color discrimination, night vision, and depth perception are thoroughly tested, especially for deck personnel.

The practical consequence of this is: despite a 10% disability rating, the seafarer may become unable to actually perform their profession because they cannot renew their health certificate. In this case:

In an objection to the SSI (Social Security Institution) rating, a claim of insufficient assessment regarding “the impact of the impairment on the profession” can be made;

In a compensation lawsuit, the actual damages are not limited solely to the 10% rating; the wage difference arising from the necessity to change professions and the disruption of economic future in the sense of Turkish Code of Obligations Article 54 are also claimed separately;

The employment contract falls within the scope of Maritime Labor Law Article 14/III-b, and the right to severance pay arises (Section 7 below).

Pre-accident existing ailments: In cases of eye loss, when determining the permanent disability rate, the effect of the insured person’s pre-accident existing eye ailment, combined with the accident, on the resulting loss must be clarified by expert witnesses and reports from the Forensic Medicine Institute. This point is the most sensitive, where both the rate and the causal link are debated.

5. Detailed Analysis of Four Supreme Court Decisions

Below, four Supreme Court decisions are examined in detail, clarifying four different critical points of a case to be opened with a 10% permanent disability rate. When these decisions are read together, it becomes clear how the case should be structured in terms of both substantive law and procedural law.

Decision 1 — Supreme Court 21st Civil Chamber, File No. 2007/16439, Decision No. 2008/4225, Date 17.03.2008

Even with a low-rate disability, there is compensation; however, temporary incapacity benefit is deducted

Incident: The plaintiff, as a result of a work accident on 30.04.2004, suffered a 13% loss of earning capacity and claimed material and moral compensation. The local court partially accepted the claim, and the defendant employer appealed the decision.

Principles established by the Chamber:

The case concerns the claim for compensation for damages not covered by the SGK (Social Security Institution). This means that the items paid by the SGK are deducted from the compensation; the case is a “residual damage” case.

Permanent incapacity for work occurs when, as a result of an occupational accident, the insured person cannot regain their former health despite all treatments, and loses a part or all of their physical capacity.

If the rate of loss of capacity to work in the profession is 10% or more, a permanent income is paid to the insured person by the Institution, and the fault of the insured person is not taken into account when this income is paid.

In contrast, temporary incapacity for work benefits may be reduced according to the fault of the insured person.

Reason for reversal: In the concrete case, temporary incapacity for work benefits were paid as 4,472.82 YTL for the period 30.04.2004–29.09.2004, and permanent incapacity for work income started from 30.09.2004; however, the compensation calculation was made starting from the accident date of 30.04.2004. In this situation, to avoid duplicate payments, the temporary incapacity for work benefit should also be deducted from the actual damage. Since this was not done, the ruling has been reversed.

Practical result for our 10% case: When obtaining a report from an actuarial expert, it must be thoroughly checked from which date the damage calculation was started. If the calculation starts from the accident date, the lump-sum capital value of the temporary incapacity for work benefit paid by the SGK and the permanent incapacity for work income received must be deducted separately. If these items are overlooked, the file will be returned due to reversal, and the process will be prolonged for years.

Decision 2 — Supreme Court 21st Civil Chamber, E. 2015/22433, K. 2016/3973, T. 10.03.2016

The principle of “loss of effort”: Continuing the same job or earning a higher wage does not mean there is no damage

Event: The insured suffered a permanent disability of only 5.3% as a result of a work accident. The local court partially accepted the claim for moral compensation; however, in its reasoning, it stated that it was necessary to reject the claim for material compensation.

Principles established by the Chamber:

Pursuant to Article 49 of the TCO, whoever causes damage to another through a faulty or unlawful act is obliged to compensate for such damage. In Article 54 of the TCO, bodily injuries are enumerated as “treatment expenses, loss of earnings, losses arising from the decrease or loss of earning capacity.” 

The insured, who became permanently disabled as a result of a work accident, has suffered bodily harm due to this loss of earning capacity, and the material damage caused by this loss of effort must be compensated from the date of the incident until death.

The most critical sentence of the decision: The fact that the insured finds a job with a higher wage after a work accident or continues in the same job and earns the same wage does not mean that there is no bodily harm.

Reason for reversal: Despite a very low rate such as 5.3%, rejecting the claim for material compensation without concrete justification and merely stating it in the reasoning is contrary to procedure and law. What should be done is to obtain a report from an accounting expert regarding the loss of earning capacity.

Practical outcome for our 10% case: This decision is the backbone of the 10% rate case. If calculating material compensation was deemed necessary even for a 5.3% rate, a material compensation calculation must certainly be made for the 10% rate. The employer’s frequently asserted defense of “the seafarer recovered, is still working at sea, even got promoted, has no damage” will not yield a result against this precedent. Because the subject of compensation is not loss of income, but the extra effort expended to earn the same income.

Decision 3 — Supreme Court 10th Civil Chamber, E. 2023/8118, K. 2023/10258, T. 25.10.2023

Hidden danger in a rate determination lawsuit: Risk of falling below the current rate

Case: For the insured who suffered a work accident, a disability rate of 19% was determined by the SGK Institution Health Board, and the High Health Board of Social Insurance also determined the rate as 19% with its decision dated 25.02.2019. In contrast, in the compensation lawsuit filed against the employer, the Forensic Medicine Institute’s 3rd Specialization Board report determined the disability as 17%, and upon objection, the Forensic Medicine Institute’s 2nd Upper Board report again determined it as 17%. The insured filed a lawsuit for the determination of the permanent incapacity rate to resolve the discrepancy between the reports.

Course of the proceedings:

The court of first instance decided to determine the permanent incapacity rate as 17%.

The Regional Court of Appeals, while acknowledging that the procedure was duly followed and that the High Board’s report stated 17%, decided to dismiss the case on the grounds that the SGK Health Board’s decision stated the rate was 19%, and therefore, a decision could not be rendered against the plaintiff.

The 10th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation upheld the decision of the Regional Court of Appeals.

Procedural rules also emphasized in the decision: The right to object to reports from institution health facilities before the Social Insurance High Health Board (5510 art. 95); that High Health Board reports are binding on the Institution but not on other interested parties (YİBK dated 28.06.1976 and numbered 6/4); and that if there is a conflict between the reports of the Forensic Medicine specialization board, the university council, and the High Health Board, this conflict must be resolved by the Forensic Medicine High Board.

The practical outcome for our 10% case — this is the most critical strategic warning: If you have a 10% disability rate issued by the SGK (Social Security Institution) and a declaratory lawsuit is filed with the belief that this rate “should be higher”, the Forensic Medicine Institute might determine a rate below 10% (e.g., 8%). Although the outcome of this decision suggests that the court cannot rule a finding that would result in an adverse outcome for the plaintiff; a low-rate Forensic Medicine report created in the file can be used as adverse evidence in a compensation lawsuit filed against the employer. Therefore, a request for an increase in the rate should only be raised if there is a medically strong basis (e.g., inability to renew a seaman’s health report, progressive eye disease, a second surgery).

Decision 4 — Supreme Court 10th Civil Chamber, E. 2023/1895, K. 2024/6416, T. 05.06.2024

Compensation even if disability is considered “none”: Temporary incapacity for work, treatment expenses, and non-pecuniary damages

Case: The plaintiff claimed 265,935.85 TL in material damages and 50,000.00 TL in non-pecuniary damages due to a work accident on 18.01.2014. As a result of the trial:

The fault distribution was determined as plaintiff 30% – employer 70%.

The court proceeded from the assumption that the plaintiff did not incur permanent incapacity for work (i.e., no disability rate was found) due to the accident.

Nevertheless, in favor of the plaintiff, an award was made for 4,083.62 TL temporary incapacity compensation, 525.00 TL treatment expenses (total 4,608.62 TL pecuniary compensation), and 35,000.00 TL non-pecuniary compensation.

The defendant employer claimed that “it is not understood how the plaintiff, with 0% disability, is entitled to non-pecuniary compensation,” that the amount is excessive, and that non-pecuniary compensation cannot be a means of enrichment. These objections were not accepted.

Critical point at the appeal stage — the monetary threshold for appeal: The Court of Appeals, stating that decisions whose amount or value does not exceed the monetary threshold for appeal cannot be appealed pursuant to Article 362 of the Code of Civil Procedure (HMK), rejected the appeal requests for both pecuniary (4,608.62 TL) and non-pecuniary (35,000.00 TL) compensation items due to the amount. As of the decision date, the monetary threshold for appeal is 107,090.00 TL. However, the plaintiff’s attorney’s appeal request concerning pecuniary compensation was examined on its merits and the decision was upheld.

Practical implications for our 10% case:

Non-pecuniary compensation is not dependent on the disability rate. Even in a case where disability was accepted as 0%, 35,000 TL non-pecuniary compensation was awarded. A request for non-pecuniary compensation for a seafarer injured in the eye on board cannot be rejected on the grounds of a low disability rate.

Pecuniary compensation is not limited to disability alone. Losses related to the temporary incapacity period and documented treatment expenses are separate items and must definitely be claimed.

The victim’s own fault reduces compensation. Cases such as not using a seatbelt/helmet/protective goggles or acting contrary to instructions can lead to contributory negligence in the 20%-40% range. In seafarer files, this risk is mitigated by checking whether personal protective equipment is provided by the employer and by training records.

The claim amount should be determined strategically. For items falling below the certainty limit, the right to appeal is closed; actions for indeterminate receivables or amendment preferences should be made with this limit in mind.

Comparative summary of four decisions

When these four decisions are read together, the resulting picture is as follows: A 10% rate, contrary to what is believed, is not a “weak” case. It meets the legal threshold (Decision 1), is sufficient for material compensation (Decision 2), efforts to increase the rate should be managed carefully (Decision 3), and moral compensation and ancillary items are not affected by a low rate (Decision 4).

6. How is Compensation Calculated for 10% Disability?

Material compensation is not found with a simple multiplication like “%10 x wage”. The actuarial expert evaluates the following elements together:

However, in moral compensation, according to the Supreme Court’s practice; the social and economic status of the parties, the severity of the incident, the fault situation, the permanent incapacity rate, the age of the worker, and the purchasing power of money are evaluated together; the awarded amount is expected to be both satisfactory and deterrent.

7. Maritime-Specific Rights: Severance Pay, Maritime Lien, and Provisional Attachment

7.1. Termination of the employment contract and severance pay

Pursuant to Article 14/III-b of the Maritime Labour Law, if a seafarer for any reason suffers from a disease or disability that permanently prevents them from working on board the vessel, the service contract may be terminated by the employer, the employer’s representative, or the seafarer. Article 20 of the Law stipulates that if the service contract is terminated by the employer for reasons other than those specified in Article 14, paragraph I, or by the seafarer pursuant to Article 14, paragraphs II and III, severance pay equivalent to 30 days’ wages for each full year worked shall be paid.

Therefore, if a seafarer’s health report cannot be renewed due to an eye defect, the right to severance pay arises regardless of which party terminates the contract. It should not be forgotten that the right to terminate must be exercised within the 6 business days period stipulated in Article 15. For our detailed assessment on the matter: What are the Rights of a Seafarer if Dismissed During the Probationary Period? Can Remaining Period Wages Be Claimed?

7.2. Maritime lien and legal lien

Pursuant to Article 1320/1-(b) of the TCC,  claims arising from loss of life or other bodily injury occurring on land or at sea directly related to the operation of the vessel grant their holders the “right of a ship creditor”. This right provides the creditor with a statutory lien on the vessel and its appurtenances (TCC Art. 1321) and can be asserted regardless of who possesses the vessel. Therefore, in a work accident compensation lawsuit, in addition to the claim for compensation, a decision should also be requested for “the recognition of a statutory lien on the vessel in favor of the plaintiff”.

For the controversial aspects of the distinction between ship claims and maritime claims: Controversial Items in the Concept of Maritime Claims and Case Law Trends

7.3. Provisional Attachment of a Vessel (Arrest)

Among the maritime claims listed in TCC Art. 1352, bodily injuries occurring directly related to the operation of the vessel are also included; work accidents are evaluated within this scope. This is the most powerful tool that makes the claim effectively collectible. However, pursuant to TCC Art. 1363, a creditor requesting provisional attachment must provide security in the amount of 10,000 Special Drawing Rights (SDR); security exemption is granted only for wage claims listed in Art. 1320/1-(a). Therefore, a claim structured together with wage and severance pay claims may provide an advantage in terms of the security burden.

For petition drafting techniques and practical conditions: How to Prepare a Petition for Provisional Attachment of a Ship? — See also regarding the scope of collateral and other securities on the ship: Ship Mortgage According to the Turkish Commercial Code

7.4. Accidents occurring abroad and repatriation

Pursuant to Article 21 of the Maritime Labor Law, in case of termination of the employment contract abroad, the employer is obliged to repatriate the seafarer to the home port and cover their travel, sustenance, and other necessary expenses. If this obligation is not complied with, the seafarer may claim the expenses incurred according to Article 24, and also compensation equivalent to 15 days’ wages.

8. Procedure: Competent Court, Mediation, Statute of Limitations

9. Things to Do After an Accident: Checklist

Ensure the accident is recorded in the ship’s log and official report; obtain the identity information of witness seamen.

Confirm that the employer reported the accident to law enforcement immediately and to SGK within a maximum of 3 business days; if not reported, document this.

Collect all treatment documents, surgery reports, epicrises, and expense receipts completely.

Obtain the seaman’s health examination documents (Annex-13) before and after the accident; if the renewal application has been rejected, be sure to get the rejection letter.

Apply to SGK for disability determination; request the decision of the Institution’s Health Board in writing.

If the rate is determined to be low, appeal to the Social Insurance High Health Board within the deadline.

Research the ship’s owner, operator, flag, IMO number, and P&I club coverage.

Check if there is an ITF/union collective bargaining agreement in the contract or on the ship; contractual disability compensation may be higher than statutory compensation.

File a compensation lawsuit (without mediation) in the labor court; also include the establishment of a statutory maritime lien on the ship in the claim.

If there is a collection risk, conduct the provisional attachment process in parallel.

10. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Is a 10% disability rate low? Will income truly be provided with this rate?

It is granted. Article 19 of Law No. 5510 requires a “loss of earning capacity in occupation of at least 10%“. 10% is the threshold itself; it is not below the threshold. Therefore, permanent disability income is granted to the insured person whose disability is determined as 10% by the Institution’s Health Board.

How much income is received with 10% disability?

In case of permanent full disability, income is granted at a rate of 70% of the monthly earnings. In case of partial disability, the portion of this amount corresponding to the degree of disability is paid. For 10% disability, this corresponds to 10% of 70% of the calculated monthly earnings. Although the amount may seem low, the granting of this income is essential for a proper calculation in a compensation lawsuit to be filed against the employer.

I continue to work on the same ship after the accident, and my salary has even increased. Can I still receive compensation?

Yes. As explicitly stated in the decision dated 10.03.2016 of the 21st Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, the fact that the insured person finds a job with a higher salary after the occupational accident or continues their same job and earns the same salary, does not mean that there is no physical harm. The subject of compensation is not loss of income, but the extra effort to be expended for a lifetime to perform the same job.

I am told I was at fault, does my right to compensation completely disappear?

No. In the permanent disability income granted by SGK (Social Security Institution), the fault of the insured person is not taken into account at all. However, in a compensation lawsuit filed against the employer, the rate of fault reduces the compensation, but does not eliminate it. Indeed, in the case subject to the decision dated 05.06.2024 of the 10th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, the fault of the injured party was determined as 30%, yet material and moral compensation was awarded.

I find the 10% rate given by SGK low. If I file a lawsuit, will the rate increase?

It may increase; however, there is also a risk of it decreasing. In the case subject to the decision of the 10th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated 25.10.2023, SGK determined a rate of 19% while the Forensic Medicine Institute determined 17%. Therefore, a request for an increase in the rate should only be brought up if there is a concrete medical basis (such as the inability to renew the seafarer’s health report, a progressive eye disease, or an additional surgical intervention). This evaluation must be made after consulting with a lawyer and a doctor.

I was injured in my eye, and my seafarer’s health report is not being renewed. What is the legal implication of this?

This is the most valuable element of the file. If the report cannot be renewed due to the vision standards in the Seafarers’ Health Directive, it means that the seafarer has become practically unable to perform their profession. In this case, both the right to severance pay arises in accordance with Article 14/III-b of the Maritime Labour Law, and the loss arising from the necessity to change profession and the disruption of economic future in the sense of Article 54 of the Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK) are also claimed in the compensation lawsuit.

Do I have to go to a mediator before filing a lawsuit for workplace accident compensation?

No. According to Article 3/3 of the Labour Courts Law No. 7036, lawsuits for material and moral compensation arising from workplace accidents, and related determination, objection, and recourse lawsuits, are exempt from the mediation requirement. However, mediation is mandatory for worker’s claims such as severance pay, notice pay, and overtime. Combining these two groups of claims in the same petition creates a risk of partial procedural dismissal.

How long do I have to file a compensation lawsuit?

Claims for material and moral compensation arising from occupational accidents are subject to a 10-year statute of limitations in accordance with Article 146 of the TCO (Turkish Code of Obligations). If the act constitutes a crime, an extended criminal statute of limitations applies. In contrast, the period for severance and notice pay is 5 years. Therefore, the time limits for these two groups of claims must be followed separately.

Are the monies I received from SGK deducted from the compensation?

Yes. As stated in the decision dated 17.03.2008 of the 21st Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, the lawsuit is essentially a claim for “compensation for damages not covered by SGK”. The initial lump-sum capital value of the permanent disability income granted is deducted from the compensation. Furthermore, if the damage calculation is made from the date of the accident, the temporary incapacity benefit paid is also offset separately to prevent duplicate payment.

I was working on a foreign-flagged ship. Do my rights change?

Yes, they change significantly. In Supreme Court practice, Maritime Labour Law No. 854 applies only to work performed on Turkish-flagged vessels; for the period spent on a foreign-flagged vessel, the provisions of the Code of Obligations come into play. However, since the ITF collective bargaining agreement, MLC 2006 standards, and the shipowner’s P&I club coverage come into consideration, the compensation that can be obtained is often higher. Ship arrest is also a powerful collection tool in these cases.

In which court and where is the lawsuit filed?

The competent court is the Labor Court. In accordance with Article 46 of the Maritime Labour Law, unless there is another provision in the service contract, the lawsuit is heard in the court competent to handle labor cases at the ship’s home port. If the dispute arises from an insurance policy or a maritime accident covered by the TCC (Turkish Commercial Code), the Civil Court of First Instance (Commercial Court) may be competent; therefore, jurisdiction must be carefully determined before filing a lawsuit.

Is a high disability rate required for moral compensation?

No. In the case subject to the decision of the 10th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated 05.06.2024, the court awarded 35,000.00 TL in moral compensation, even though it accepted that the plaintiff did not suffer permanent incapacitation, and this decision was upheld during the appeal and cassation stages. What is decisive in moral compensation is the severity of the incident, the status of the parties, and the distribution of fault.

Why is Expert Lawyer Support Necessary?

A maritime work accident case simultaneously concerns the fields of Maritime Labor Law, Social Security Law, Law of Obligations, Maritime Commercial Law, and Criminal Law. The four Court of Cassation decisions examined above demonstrate that in these cases, losses often arise not from substantive law, but from procedural law: the failure to audit set-off items, incorrect timing of the request for a rate increase, determination of the claim amount without considering the certainty limit, incorrect application of the mediation prerequisite for litigation, and never requesting a statutory lien on the vessel are the most common errors leading to loss of rights.

Furthermore, time is of great importance in seafarer cases: when a ship moves to another port or changes ownership, the possibility of collection becomes severely difficult. Therefore, a precautionary attachment and P&I security investigation should be conducted simultaneously with the compensation lawsuit.

2M Law Firm operates in Tuzla, one of Turkey’s most important shipbuilding, maintenance-repair, and shipyard centers. Our office provides legal consultancy and litigation services to seamen and shipowners seeking an Istanbul seaman’s lawyer, Tuzla seaman’s lawyer, Istanbul maritime commercial law lawyer, Tuzla maritime commercial lawyer, maritime work accident lawyer, Istanbul work accident compensation lawyer, and maritime labor law lawyer; throughout the Anatolian Side of Istanbul, particularly in Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe, Gebze, Darıca, Çayırova, and Kocaeli.

If you have had a work accident on a ship, wish to object to the disability rating determined by SGK (Social Security Institution) or initiate a compensation process against your employer, you can contact 2M Law Firm and have your case legally evaluated.