Introduction

This article has been prepared through an analysis of judicial decisions and legal documents presented in response to the questions “What is loss of support compensation?” and “Can this compensation be claimed?”. The article examines the definition, purpose, conditions for claim, legal nature, and practical differences of loss of support compensation, regulated under Article 53/3 of the Turkish Code of Obligations (Law No. 6098). The analysis addresses the topic from a holistic perspective, based on various decisions of the Supreme Court, Regional Courts of Justice, and Courts of First Instance.

Definition and Purpose: Loss of support compensation is the compensation for damages suffered by individuals who were benefiting from the material support of a person during their lifetime, due to being deprived of this support as a result of the person’s death caused by an unlawful act. In judicial decisions, the fundamental purpose of the compensation is consistently to “protect the social and economic status of those deprived of support, reflecting their lives before the death of the supporter.” (e.g.: bam-Ankara Regional Court of Justice 35th Civil Chamber-2022/447-2022/633).

Key Requirement “Actual Support”: The most fundamental condition for compensation to be awarded is the existence of an actual situation, rather than a legal bond (such as kinship, heirship, etc.), between the deceased person (supporter) and the person claiming compensation (deprived of support). In judicial decisions, this situation is referred to as “the existence of regular and actual financial assistance between the deceased and the person deprived of support.” 

An Independent and Primary Right: This right to compensation is not a right inherited by the deceased’s heirs, but an “original and independent” right that arises directly in the person who lost their support. As stated in the decision of the Insurance Arbitration Commission, this loss “can be suffered independently of one’s status as an heir.” (sigorta—–2015/İHK.1294-03.06.2016).

The Role of Fault: The general rule is that compensation can be claimed in proportion to the fault of those responsible. However, there are different approaches regarding whether compensation can be claimed in cases where the supporter is 100% at fault. While some decisions state that relatives cannot claim compensation if the supporter is entirely at fault (ilkDerece-Ankara 4. Asliye Ticaret Mahkemesi-2021/736-2022/314), this issue is contentious in Supreme Court jurisprudence and is evaluated according to the specifics of the concrete case.

1. Legal Basis and Conceptual Framework

Loss of support compensation is regulated in Article 53 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098, under the heading “Damages in Case of Death”. The 3rd paragraph of the article stipulated that this damage shall be compensated with the expression “losses incurred by individuals deprived of the deceased’s support due to this reason.” 

Judicial rulings do not view the purpose of this compensation merely as remedying a material loss but emphasize that it has a social dimension. In a referred decision of the Grand General Assembly for Unification of Jurisprudence of the Court of Cassation, the nature of the compensation was explained as follows: “It was emphasized that Loss of Support Compensation is not a penalty corresponding to the act, but a unique compensation of a social character aimed at preventing the person deprived of the deceased’s support from falling into need as a result of death and maintaining their standard of living at the level prior to the supporter’s death.” (First Instance-Bakırköy 1st Civil Court of Commerce-2019/912-2021/1169)

2. Conditions for Compensation and the Concept of “Support”

When ruling on loss of support compensation, courts seek the existence of specific conditions. The most crucial of these conditions is the content of the concept of “support.” Decisions consistently emphasize that this concept refers to a factual situation rather than a legal relationship: “The concept of support mentioned in Article 53/3 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 targets a factual situation, not a legal relationship, and is not based on kinship or the provisions of law concerning alimony; only a person who factually and regularly provides assistance to partially or fully secure one’s livelihood, and who, according to the ordinary course of events, would have continued to provide this assistance in the more or less near future had death not occurred, is considered a supporter.” (firstInstance-Istanbul Anadolu 5th Civil Court of Commerce-2022/2-2022/1069)

In this context, the existence of regular and continuous assistance is essential. Furthermore, in some decisions, it has been stated as an additional condition that the person deprived of support must be “in continuous and genuine need” (firstInstance-Samsun Civil Court of Commerce-2021/1075-2023/639).

On the other hand, in lawsuits filed by parents due to the death of their children, a simplification has been provided regarding the burden of proof. In the decision of the Ankara 6th Civil Court of Commerce, this situation was expressed as: “In lawsuits for loss of support compensation filed by parents due to the death of their child as a result of tort and/or breach of contract, it must be presumed that children were providing support to their parents.” 

3. Impact of Fault on Compensation Claim

The fault status plays a critical role in whether the compensation claim is accepted or rejected. In cases where those responsible are partially at fault, paying compensation proportionate to their fault is a general rule.

However, the most controversial issue arises in cases where the deceased supporter is fully (100%) at fault for the occurrence of the incident. Among the decisions reviewed, the Ankara 4th Civil Court of Commerce’s decision numbered 2022/314 suggests that in such a situation, the compensation claim should be rejected. The court based its view on the following reasoning: “…that compensation for loss of support is a damage that arises by way of reflection, and those claiming support compensation cannot have more rights than the person who provided them support…” This approach considers the right to compensation for loss of support as a “reflective damage” dependent on the deceased’s right to claim compensation for their own losses. However, this view may create a conflict with established precedents holding that the right to compensation is an “independent and inherent right.” Indeed, in the decision of the Izmir Regional Court of Justice, it was stated that this right belongs  “not to the persons left behind as heirs of the supporter, but to those deprived of their support” and will not be affected by the fault of the supporting person. Therefore, the fate of compensation claims in cases where the supporter is fully at fault is an issue that must be carefully evaluated within the framework of the Supreme Court’s current jurisprudence and the specific circumstances of the case.

Conclusion

As a result of the examination, it is concluded that compensation for loss of support;

is a distinctive type of compensation with a social character, aiming to preserve the pre-death living standards of those deprived of the actual and regular assistance of a person who died as a result of an unlawful act,

the primary condition for the claim is the existence of an actual, regular, and continuous support relationship, rather than legal ties such as kinship,

This right is an independent right, not included in the deceased’s estate, arising directly in the person of the one deprived of support,

It has been determined that compensation claims are accepted in proportion to the fault of those responsible, however, in cases where the deceased supporter was entirely at fault, the issue of whether compensation can be claimed is controversial in judicial decisions and open to different interpretations.

Therefore, in claims for loss of support compensation, proving the actual support relationship with concrete evidence and particularly determining the fault ratios in the accident will be decisive for the outcome of the case. A paper suggestion.

Why is Tuzla Lawyer Support Necessary?

Loss of support compensation cases are complex legal processes with both material and moral dimensions. In these cases, collecting the correct evidence, proving the actual support relationship, correctly assessing fault ratios, and following current Supreme Court precedents are of great importance.

Compensation calculations, in particular, require technical knowledge, and even a small error can lead to a loss of rights. Furthermore, errors made concerning issues such as the fault of the supporter, the liability of insurance companies, and statutes of limitations for lawsuits, can even lead to the complete rejection of compensation.

A lawyer operating in Tuzla;

provides professional support regarding collecting and submitting evidence to the court,

plays a role in correctly determining fault ratios and making objections,

Prevents loss of rights in negotiations with insurance companies and the opposing party,

Conducts the case in the strongest way by following current Supreme Court and Regional Court of Justice decisions.

Therefore, for individuals residing in Tuzla or filing a lawsuit here, or in regions such as Istanbul, Tuzla lawyer, Pendik lawyer, Kartal lawyer, Maltepe lawyer, Gebze lawyer, Aydınlı lawyer, Orhanlı lawyer, Tepeören lawyer, Darıca lawyer, Bayramoğlu lawyer or Çayırova lawyer, Şekerpınar lawyer, Güzelyalı lawyer, Postane lawyer and Akfırat lawyer, receiving professional support from an experienced Tuzla lawyer is extremely important both for accelerating the process and for obtaining the highest amount of compensation.