Where an estate has a foreign element, Turkish law does not give one answer. Article 20(1) of Law No. 5718 makes succession subject in principle to the national law of the deceased, but carves out immovable property situated in Türkiye and subjects it to Turkish law. One estate can therefore be governed by two legal systems at once.
Where Turkish law applies, the Civil Code determines the heirs, their shares and the limits on testamentary dispositions. A foreign grant of probate is not automatically a substitute for a Turkish certificate for immovable property, and a foreign applicant must obtain the certificate through the court. The sections below address these documents, reserved shares and the requirement for heirs to act together.
The conflict-of-laws framework and the property-ownership limits that sit around it are set out in property acquisition by foreigners. This article deals with what happens once Turkish inheritance law applies.
1. Which Country’s Law Governs the Inheritance?
The court must determine the applicable law under Law No. 5718 before applying the Civil Code. The location of property in Türkiye does not remove that preliminary assessment, even where the assessment leads to Turkish law.
Yargıtay 8. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2013/23629, K. 2014/18556 — the court must apply the conflict rule first
“Türk mahkemelerinde açılan ve yabancılık unsuru taşıyan miras davasında, mahkeme, doğrudan Türk Medeni Kanunu (TMK)‘ndaki miras hükümlerini uygulayamaz.”
(Yargıtay 8. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2013/23629, K. 2014/18556, T. 17.10.2014 — BOZULMASINA)
Unofficial translation: “In a succession case brought before the Turkish courts and carrying a foreign element, the court cannot directly apply the succession provisions of the Turkish Civil Code.”
The court must first determine, under Law No. 5718, which country’s law applies, and only then apply it. In the case before the chamber the deceased was a Norwegian national who died owning a flat in Antalya. Both connecting factors led to Turkish law for that flat, yet the step could not be skipped; omitting it was a ground for reversal.
2. Who Inherits Under Turkish Law
Turkish law organises statutory heirs in classes. The first class is the descendants:
4721 sayılı Türk Medenî Kanunu m.495 — Altsoy
“Madde 495- Mirasbırakanın birinci derece mirasçıları, onun altsoyudur. Çocuklar eşit olarak mirasçıdırlar. Mirasbırakandan önce ölmüş olan çocukların yerini, her derecede halefiyet yoluyla kendi altsoyları alır.”
Unofficial translation: “The first-degree heirs of the deceased are their descendants. Children inherit in equal shares. The place of children who died before the deceased is taken, at every degree, by their own descendants by way of substitution.”
If there are no descendants, the estate moves to the second class:
4721 sayılı Türk Medenî Kanunu m.496 — Ana ve baba
“Madde 496- Altsoyu bulunmayan mirasbırakanın mirasçıları, ana ve babasıdır. Bunlar eşit olarak mirasçıdırlar. Mirasbırakandan önce ölmüş olan ana ve babanın yerlerini, her derecede halefiyet yoluyla kendi altsoyları alır. Bir tarafta hiç mirasçı bulunmadığı takdirde, bütün miras diğer taraftaki mirasçılara kalır.”
Unofficial translation: “The heirs of a deceased person without descendants are their mother and father. They inherit in equal shares. The place of a mother or father who died before the deceased is taken, at every degree, by their own descendants by way of substitution. Where there is no heir at all on one side, the whole estate passes to the heirs on the other side.”
The surviving spouse does not belong to any class. The spouse inherits alongside whichever class applies, and the share changes with it:
4721 sayılı Türk Medenî Kanunu m.499 — Sağ kalan eş
“Madde 499- Sağ kalan eş, birlikte bulunduğu zümreye göre mirasbırakana aşağıdaki oranlarda mirasçı olur: 1. Mirasbırakanın altsoyu ile birlikte mirasçı olursa, mirasın dörtte biri, 2. Mirasbırakanın ana ve baba zümresi ile birlikte mirasçı olursa, mirasın yarısı, 3. Mirasbırakanın büyük ana ve büyük babaları ve onların çocukları ile birlikte mirasçı olursa, mirasın dörtte üçü, bunlar da yoksa mirasın tamamı eşe kalır.”
Unofficial translation: “The surviving spouse inherits from the deceased in the following proportions according to the class alongside which they inherit: 1. where inheriting alongside the descendants of the deceased, one quarter of the estate; 2. where inheriting alongside the class of the mother and father of the deceased, one half of the estate; 3. where inheriting alongside the grandparents of the deceased and their children, three quarters of the estate, and where those do not exist either, the whole estate passes to the spouse.”
The practical consequence is usually unexpected. Where there are children, the spouse takes one quarter and the remaining three quarters are divided equally among the children. The spouse’s share grows only where there is neither a descendant nor a surviving parent class. The common assumption that the Turkish property simply passes to the widow or widower does not hold for an asset governed by Turkish law.
3. Reserved Shares and an Action for Abatement
A will that is valid in form does not mean its contents apply without limit. Certain heirs are entitled to a statutory minimum:
4721 sayılı Türk Medenî Kanunu m.506 — Saklı pay
“Madde 506- Saklı pay aşağıdaki oranlardan ibarettir: 1. Altsoy için yasal miras payının yarısı, 2. Ana ve babadan her biri için yasal miras payının dörtte biri, 3. (Mülga: 4/5/2007-5650/2 md.) 4. Sağ kalan eş için, altsoy veya ana ve baba zümresiyle birlikte mirasçı olması hâlinde yasal miras payının tamamı, diğer hâllerde yasal miras payının dörtte üçü.”
Unofficial translation: “The reserved share consists of the following proportions: 1. for descendants, one half of the statutory share; 2. for each of the mother and father, one quarter of the statutory share; 3. (Repealed: 4/5/2007-5650/2) 4. for the surviving spouse, the whole of the statutory share where inheriting alongside the class of descendants or of the mother and father, and three quarters of the statutory share in other cases.”
The repeal of the third subparagraph is visible in the text of the article itself: the reserved share of siblings was abolished in 2007. Sources written before that date still describe it, which is a recurring source of error.
Where the reserved share is encroached upon, the remedy is an action for abatement:
4721 sayılı Türk Medenî Kanunu m.560 — Tenkis davası
“Madde 560- Saklı paylarının karşılığını alamayan mirasçılar, mirasbırakanın tasarruf edebileceği kısmı aşan tasarruflarının tenkisini dava edebilirler. Yasal mirasçıların paylarına ilişkin olarak tasarrufta yer alan kurallar, mirasbırakanın arzusunun başka türlü olduğu tasarruftan anlaşılmadıkça, sadece paylaştırma kuralları sayılır.”
Unofficial translation: “Heirs who do not receive the equivalent of their reserved shares may bring an action for the abatement of the dispositions of the deceased exceeding the portion of which they could dispose. Rules contained in a disposition concerning the shares of statutory heirs are deemed to be mere rules of distribution, unless it appears from the disposition that the intention of the deceased was otherwise.”
The Court of Cassation sets both the order in which abatement is applied and the figure against which it is measured:
Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2024/4725, K. 2025/2611 — the order of abatement
“Tenkis, saklı pay tamamlanıncaya kadar, önce ölüme bağlı tasarruflardan, bu yetmezse, en yeni tarihlisinden en eskisine doğru geriye gidilmek üzere sağlararası kazandırmalardan yapılır (TMK.md.570).”
(Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2024/4725, K. 2025/2611, T. 14.05.2025 — BOZULMASINA)
Unofficial translation: “Abatement is applied, until the reserved share is made up, first to dispositions upon death and, if that is insufficient, to lifetime dispositions, working backwards from the most recent to the oldest (Civil Code Article 570).”
Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2024/4725, K. 2025/2611 — calculated on the net estate
“Mirasbırakanın, saklı payı zedeleyip zedelemediği “net tereke” üzerinden hesaplanır. Net tereke ise, terekenin aktifinden terekenin pasifinin indirilmesi ile bulunur.”
(Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2024/4725, K. 2025/2611, T. 14.05.2025 — BOZULMASINA)
Unofficial translation: “Whether the deceased has encroached upon the reserved share is calculated over the net estate. The net estate is found by deducting the liabilities of the estate from its assets.”
For an heir abroad this has a concrete consequence: the value of the Turkish flat on its own does not show whether the reserved share has been encroached upon. The assets and liabilities of the whole estate have to be established before any abatement calculation can be built.
4. Obtaining a Certificate of Inheritance
A certificate of inheritance records heirship under Article 598. Where the applicant is a foreigner, Article 71/B of the Notary Law requires the court route rather than notarial issue.
“Madde 598- Başvurusu üzerine yasal mirasçı oldukları belirlenenlere, sulh mahkemesince veya noterlikçe mirasçılık sıfatlarını gösteren bir belge verilir.”
Unofficial translation: “Upon their application, a document showing their status as heirs is issued by the civil court of peace or by a notary to those who are determined to be statutory heirs.”
The certificate of inheritance guide for foreign heirs explains the civil court of peace application, foreign documents, authentication and representation. It also distinguishes initial issue from a contentious claim to cancel an existing certificate.
A foreign grant of probate should not be assumed to replace a Turkish certificate for immovable property in Turkey. The same guide examines the Court of Cassation’s distinction between recognition and use of the foreign document as discretionary evidence.
5. Opening a Will, and Service on an Heir Abroad
Formal validity is one question; the procedure by which a will takes effect is another. The Civil Code ties the opening to a period and a forum:
4721 sayılı Türk Medenî Kanunu m.596 — Vasiyetnamenin açılması
“Madde 596- Vasiyetname, geçerli olup olmadığına bakılmaksızın tesliminden başlayarak bir ay içinde mirasbırakanın yerleşim yeri sulh hâkimi tarafından açılır ve ilgililere okunur. Bilinen mirasçılar ve diğer ilgililer vasiyetnamenin açılması sırasında diledikleri takdirde hazır bulunmak üzere çağrılır. Mirasbırakanın sonradan ortaya çıkan vasiyetnameleri için de aynı işlemler yapılır.”
Unofficial translation: “A will is opened and read to the interested parties by the civil court of peace judge of the deceased’s domicile within one month of its delivery, irrespective of whether it is valid. Known heirs and other interested parties are summoned so that they may attend the opening if they wish. The same procedure applies to wills of the deceased that come to light later.”
The provision that matters most to an heir living abroad is the next one:
4721 sayılı Türk Medenî Kanunu m.597 — İlgililere tebliğ
“Madde 597- Mirasta hak sahibi olanların her birine gideri terekeye ait olmak üzere, vasiyetnamenin kendilerine ilişkin kısımlarının onaylı bir örneği hâkim tarafından tebliğ edilir. Nerede olduğu bilinmeyenlere vasiyetnamenin kendilerine ilişkin kısımları ilân yolu ile tebliğ olunur.”
Unofficial translation: “A certified copy of the parts of the will concerning them is served by the judge on each person having a claim in the estate, at the expense of the estate. The parts concerning persons whose whereabouts are unknown are served on them by way of public notice.”
An heir whose address is not known to the Turkish authorities may therefore be served by publication. Time limits can begin to run without that heir ever having seen a document. Keeping a current address on file, or appointing someone in Türkiye to receive service, is a practical safeguard rather than a formality.
The chamber treats service as a precondition of the opening itself:
Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2025/3957, K. 2025/4101 — service is a precondition
“Bu hâlde; 6100 sayılı Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu’nun 27. maddesinde hükme bağlanan “Hukuki Dinlenilme Hakkı” gereğince mirasçılara tebliğ işleminin yapılması suretiyle vasiyetnamenin açılmasında ön koşulun sağlanması (TMK 596, 597, 598) ve TMK’nın 596/2. maddesi uyarınca vasiyetnamenin murisin bilinen tüm mirasçılarına okunması gerekir.”
(Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2025/3957, K. 2025/4101, T. 06.10.2025 — BOZULMASINA)
Unofficial translation: “In this situation, pursuant to the right to be heard laid down in Article 27 of Law No. 6100, the precondition for the opening of the will must be satisfied by effecting service on the heirs (Civil Code Articles 596, 597, 598), and under Article 596(2) of the Civil Code the will must be read to all known heirs of the deceased.”
At this stage the judge does not examine whether the will is valid. The task is to open it, serve it, issue a certificate of inheritance on request, and provisionally hand over or place the estate under official administration.
5.1. When Does the Time Limit to Challenge a Will Begin?
If the will is to be challenged, the period does not run from the death:
Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2024/3670, K. 2025/1885 — one year from the opening decision
“O hâlde, Mahkemece; vasiyetnamenin iptali için bir yıllık hak düşürücü sürenin “vasiyetnamenin açılıp okunması” kararının kesinleşmesinden itibaren işlemeye başlayacağı gözönünde bulundurulup işin esasına girilerek, yapılacak inceleme neticesinde oluşacak sonuca göre bir hüküm kurulması gerekirken, yazılı şekilde hak düşürücü süre yönünden davanın usulden reddine karar verilmiş olması doğru görülmemiş, bozmayı gerektirmiştir.”
(Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2024/3670, K. 2025/1885, T. 10.04.2025 — BOZULMASINA)
Unofficial translation: “Accordingly, whereas the court should have taken into account that the one-year preclusive period for the annulment of a will begins to run from the finalisation of the decision on the opening and reading of the will, and should have proceeded to the merits and given judgment according to the result of the examination to be carried out, its dismissal of the action on procedural grounds by reason of the preclusive period was not found correct and required reversal.”
Years having passed since the death does not by itself extinguish the right to challenge. The measure is the date on which the opening decision became final.
6. Disclaiming the Inheritance: Three Months, and What Comes After
A Turkish estate transmits debts as well as assets. The Civil Code gives heirs a way out, and a deadline:
4721 sayılı Türk Medenî Kanunu m.605 — Mirasın reddi
“Madde 605- Yasal ve atanmış mirasçılar mirası reddedebilirler. Ölümü tarihinde mirasbırakanın ödemeden aczi açıkça belli veya resmen tespit edilmiş ise, miras reddedilmiş sayılır.”
Unofficial translation: “Statutory and appointed heirs may reject the inheritance. Where the insolvency of the deceased was manifest or officially established at the date of death, the inheritance is deemed to have been rejected.”
4721 sayılı Türk Medenî Kanunu m.606 — Ret süresi
“Madde 606- Miras, üç ay içinde reddolunabilir. Bu süre, yasal mirasçılar için mirasçı olduklarını daha sonra öğrendikleri ispat edilmedikçe mirasbırakanın ölümünü öğrendikleri; vasiyetname ile atanmış mirasçılar için mirasbırakanın tasarrufunun kendilerine resmen bildirildiği tarihten işlemeye başlar.”
Unofficial translation: “The inheritance may be rejected within three months. For statutory heirs this period begins to run from the date on which they learned of the death of the deceased, unless it is proved that they learned later that they were heirs; for heirs appointed by will, from the date on which the disposition of the deceased was officially notified to them.”
Read closely, the article does not give heirs abroad any automatic extension. Being outside Türkiye does not postpone the three months; what postpones them is proof of later knowledge of the status of heir. In files where service has to be effected abroad, that distinction often decides the outcome.
The second paragraph of Article 605 opens a separate route, and the Court of Cassation has described both its scope and what it does not depend on:
Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2025/314, K. 2025/3943 — rejection by operation of law is not time-barred
“Türk Medeni Kanunu’nun 605/2 hükmü gereğince mirasın hükmen reddine (terekenin borca batık olduğunun tespitine) ilişkin talepler, süreye tâbi olmayıp mirasçıların iyiniyetli ya da kötüniyetli olmalarının bir önemi bulunmamaktadır.”
(Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2025/314, K. 2025/3943, T. 30.09.2025 — BOZULMASINA)
Unofficial translation: “Pursuant to Article 605(2) of the Turkish Civil Code, requests concerning rejection of the inheritance by operation of law (the establishment that the estate is insolvent) are not subject to a time limit, and it is of no importance whether the heirs are in good faith or in bad faith.”
Rejection by operation of law is a separate question from the three-month period for disclaiming. The same decision identifies the date at which the estate’s insolvency must be assessed:
Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2025/314, K. 2025/3943 — insolvency measured at the date of death
“Murisin ödemeden aczi ölüm tarihine göre belirlenir. Ölüm tarihi itibarıyla, murisin tüm malvarlığı terekenin aktifini, tüm borçları ise terekenin pasifini oluşturur. Terekenin pasifinin aktifinden fazla olması terekenin ödemeden aczini ve dolayısıyla da terekenin borca batık olduğunu gösterir (TMK m. 605/2).”
(Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2025/314, K. 2025/3943, T. 30.09.2025 — BOZULMASINA)
Unofficial translation: “The insolvency of the deceased is determined as at the date of death. As at the date of death, all assets of the deceased constitute the assets of the estate and all debts constitute its liabilities. The liabilities of the estate exceeding its assets shows the insolvency of the estate and therefore that the estate is over-indebted (Civil Code Article 605(2)).”
The measure is the date of death, not the date of the action. Changes in value occurring after the death do not affect the assessment.
7. The Heirs Must Act Together
Where there is more than one heir, the estate is held jointly. This affects how the heirs exercise rights over estate property:
4721 sayılı Türk Medenî Kanunu m.640 — Miras ortaklığı
“Madde 640- Birden çok mirasçı bulunması hâlinde, mirasın geçmesiyle birlikte paylaşmaya kadar, mirasçılar arasında terekedeki bütün hak ve borçları kapsayan bir ortaklık meydana gelir. Mirasçılar terekeye elbirliğiyle sahip olurlar ve sözleşme veya kanundan doğan temsil ya da yönetim yetkisi saklı kalmak üzere, terekeye ait bütün haklar üzerinde birlikte tasarruf ederler. Mirasçılardan birinin istemi üzerine sulh mahkemesi, miras ortaklığına paylaşmaya kadar bir temsilci atayabilir.”
Unofficial translation: “Where there is more than one heir, upon the passing of the estate and until partition a community arises among the heirs covering all rights and obligations in the estate. The heirs own the estate jointly and, subject to powers of representation or administration arising from contract or from law, dispose together of all rights belonging to the estate. Upon the application of any one of the heirs, the civil court of peace may appoint a representative to the community of heirs until partition.”
In litigation the consequence is strict:
Yargıtay 3. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2025/2695, K. 2026/287 — heirs are necessary joined parties
“Elbirliği mülkiyeti gereği miras yoluyla terekeye dahil olan varlıklar ile ilgili mirasçıların bir kısmı tarafından dava açılması halinde, mirasçılar kendi açtıkları bu davayı yalnız başına yürütemeyeceğinden davanın bütün mirasçılar ile birlikte yürütülmesi gerekir.”
(Yargıtay 3. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2025/2695, K. 2026/287, T. 21.01.2026 — BOZULMASINA)
Unofficial translation: “By reason of joint ownership, where an action concerning assets forming part of the estate by inheritance is brought by some of the heirs, since those heirs cannot pursue the action they have brought on their own, the action must be pursued together with all the heirs.”
The same decision explains the requirement for consent or appointment of a representative:
Yargıtay 3. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2025/2695, K. 2026/287 — consent or a representative
“Eğer diğer mirasçılar davaya katılmaz ve yazılı muvafakat da vermezler ise bu durumda davayı açan mirasçıların terekeye bir temsilci tayin ettirmesi gerekir.”
(Yargıtay 3. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2025/2695, K. 2026/287, T. 21.01.2026 — BOZULMASINA)
Unofficial translation: “If the other heirs neither join the action nor give written consent, then the heirs who brought the action must have a representative appointed to the estate.”
Where the required consent cannot be obtained, appointment of an estate representative provides the alternative described in the decision. The representative’s legal status is explained in the following judgment:
Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2022/6830, K. 2023/971 — the representative is a special curator
“Miras ortaklığı temsilcisi (TMK m. 640) özel kayyım niteliğindedir.”
(Yargıtay 7. Hukuk Dairesi, E. 2022/6830, K. 2023/971, T. 20.02.2023 — REDDİNE)
Unofficial translation: “The representative of the community of heirs (Civil Code Article 640) has the character of a special curator.”
Applications to appoint a representative go to the civil court of peace; objections to the person appointed are examined first by the guardianship authority and then, if not accepted, by the supervisory authority.
8. Inheritance Tax
Once the applicable law is settled, the tax question follows, and its connecting factor is again the location of the asset:
7338 sayılı Veraset ve İntikal Vergisi Kanunu m.1 — Verginin mevzuu
“Madde 1 – Türkiye Cumhuriyeti tabiyetinde bulunan şahıslara ait mallar ile Türkiye’de bulunan malların veraset tarikiyle veya her hangi bir suretle olursa olsun ivazsız bir tarzda bir şahıstan diğer şahsa intikali Veraset ve İntikal Vergisine tabidir. Bu vergi, Türk tabiiyetinde bulunan şahısların ecnebi memleketlerde aynı yollardan iktisabedecekleri mallara da şamildir. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti tabiiyetindeki bir şahsın Türkiye hudutları dışında bulunan malını veraset tarikıyle veya sair suretle ivazsız bir tarzda iktisabeden ve Türkiye’de ikametgahı olmıyan ecnebi şahıs bu vergi ile mükellef tutulmaz.”
Unofficial translation: “The transmission from one person to another, by inheritance or in any gratuitous manner whatsoever, of property belonging to persons of the nationality of the Republic of Türkiye and of property situated in Türkiye is subject to Inheritance and Transfer Tax. This tax also covers property acquired in foreign countries by the same means by persons of Turkish nationality. A foreign person who acquires, by inheritance or otherwise gratuitously, property situated outside the borders of Türkiye belonging to a person of the nationality of the Republic of Türkiye, and who has no domicile in Türkiye, shall not be liable to this tax.”
The article reads in two directions. Property situated in Türkiye falls within the scope of the tax irrespective of the nationality of either the deceased or the heir, so a foreign heir acquiring the Turkish flat is within it. The final sentence draws a narrow boundary in the other direction: a foreign person without a domicile in Türkiye is not liable in respect of property located outside Türkiye acquired gratuitously from a Turkish national.
The logic mirrors the conflict rule in Article 20 of Law No. 5718: the connecting factor is not the person but the asset.
Related reading: property acquisition by foreigners in Türkiye · how to get Turkish citizenship · Turkish citizenship by investment
Frequently Asked Questions
Which law governs the inheritance of a property in Turkey?
Turkish law, because of where the property is. Article 20(1) of Law No. 5718 makes succession subject in principle to the national law of the deceased, but expressly carves out immovable property situated in Türkiye and subjects it to Turkish law. The test is the location of the asset, not the nationality of the deceased or of the heir. The conflict-of-laws framework is set out in detail in our article on buying property in Turkey.
Can a Turkish court just apply Turkish law because the property is here?
Not without going through the conflict rule first. The Court of Cassation held that in a succession case carrying a foreign element the court cannot directly apply the Civil Code; it must first decide which country's law applies by applying the conflict rules in Law No. 5718 (8th Civil Chamber, E. 2013/23629, K. 2014/18556, T. 17.10.2014). Even where the answer turns out to be Turkish law, skipping the step is a ground for reversal.
Will my UK grant of probate or German Erbschein work in Turkey?
No, not for immovable property in Türkiye. Because Turkish law applies to such property, the Turkish courts have exclusive jurisdiction, and a certificate of inheritance issued by a foreign court cannot be recognised (8th Civil Chamber, E. 2013/23629, K. 2014/18556). The same decision confirms that the foreign document is not worthless: it may be submitted as discretionary evidence in a fresh Turkish action for a certificate of inheritance.
Can a foreign heir get a certificate of inheritance from a notary?
No. Article 71/B of Law No. 1512 states that where the certificate of inheritance is requested by foreigners it cannot be issued by notaries. A Turkish citizen may obtain one from a notary the same day; a foreign heir must apply to the civil court of peace. This is the channel itself, not a delay, and it should be planned for from the outset.
Who inherits under Turkish law and in what shares?
Article 495 of Law No. 4721 puts descendants in the first class, sharing equally. If there are no descendants, Article 496 moves to the parents. The surviving spouse sits outside the classes and inherits alongside whichever class applies: one quarter with descendants, one half with the parents' class, three quarters with grandparents and their children, and the whole estate if none of those exist (Article 499).
Does the surviving spouse get half the property?
Not where there are children. Under Article 499(1) of Law No. 4721 the spouse takes one quarter when inheriting alongside descendants, and the remaining three quarters are divided equally among the children. The widely held belief that the property passes automatically or half-and-half to the spouse is not correct for an asset governed by Turkish law.
Can a will override the statutory shares?
Only up to a limit. Article 506 of Law No. 4721 fixes a reserved share for descendants, for each parent and for the surviving spouse, and Article 560 allows an heir who does not receive it to bring an action for abatement. Note that the reserved share of siblings was repealed in 2007, which is why older sources still mention it.
How is the reserved share calculated?
On the net estate, not on the single asset in dispute. The Court of Cassation stated that whether the reserved share has been encroached upon is calculated over the net estate, which is found by deducting the liabilities of the estate from its assets (7th Civil Chamber, E. 2024/4725, K. 2025/2611, T. 14.05.2025). The same decision sets the order of abatement: first dispositions upon death, then lifetime dispositions working back from the most recent.
How long do I have to disclaim an inheritance?
Three months. Under Article 606 of Law No. 4721 the period runs, for statutory heirs, from the date they learn of the death, unless it is proved that they learned of their status as heir later. Living abroad does not extend the period by itself; what extends it is proof of later knowledge.
What if the three months have already passed?
There may still be a route if the estate was insolvent. Article 605(2) of Law No. 4721 deems the inheritance rejected where the deceased's insolvency was manifest or officially established at the date of death, and the Court of Cassation held that requests for this form of rejection are not subject to a time limit and that the good or bad faith of the heirs is irrelevant (7th Civil Chamber, E. 2025/314, K. 2025/3943, T. 30.09.2025). Insolvency is measured as at the date of death.
Can one heir deal with the property alone?
No. Article 640 of Law No. 4721 creates a community of heirs holding the estate jointly, and the Court of Cassation held that heirs are necessary joined parties, so an action brought by some of them cannot be pursued alone (3rd Civil Chamber, E. 2025/2695, K. 2026/287, T. 21.01.2026). Either the other heirs join or give written consent, or a representative must be appointed to the estate.
What is an estate representative and who appoints one?
Under Article 640(3) of Law No. 4721 the civil court of peace may appoint a representative to the community of heirs on the application of any one heir. The Court of Cassation described the representative as a special form of curator (7th Civil Chamber, E. 2022/6830, K. 2023/971, T. 20.02.2023). Where heirs live in different countries and consent cannot practically be collected, this is the ordinary solution rather than an exceptional one.
How is a will opened in Turkey, and what if I live abroad?
Under Article 596 of Law No. 4721 the will is opened by the civil court of peace of the deceased's domicile within one month of delivery, regardless of whether it is valid. Article 597 requires the relevant parts to be served on each person with a claim, and where a person's whereabouts are unknown, service is by public notice. An heir abroad whose address is not known to the Turkish authorities may therefore be served by publication and find that time limits have begun without their knowledge.
When does the time limit to challenge a will start?
From the finalisation of the decision opening and reading the will, not from the death. The Court of Cassation reversed a decision that had dismissed such a claim as time-barred, holding that the one-year period runs from the date the opening and reading decision became final (7th Civil Chamber, E. 2024/3670, K. 2025/1885, T. 10.04.2025).
Is inheritance tax payable by a foreign heir in Turkey?
Where the asset is in Türkiye, yes. Article 1 of Law No. 7338 brings within the scope of the tax both property belonging to persons of Turkish nationality and property situated in Türkiye, passing by inheritance or gratuitously. The connecting factor is the location of the asset rather than the nationality of the parties. The final paragraph carves out a narrow case: a foreign person without a domicile in Türkiye is not liable in respect of property located outside Türkiye that they acquire gratuitously from a Turkish national.