Who Gets the Wedding Jewellery in a Turkish Divorce? Return of Wedding Gold and How to Prove It

1. What counts as wedding jewellery, and how does the law treat it?

Ziynet is the Turkish term for valuable gifts pinned on the couple at the wedding: bracelets, necklaces, earrings, quarter, half and full gold coins, gram gold, foreign currency and cash. A case to recover them is commonly called a ziynet claim (ziynet alacağı davası).

The law has no special rule for wedding jewellery, so general rules apply together:

• Custom: Where the law contains no applicable provision, the judge decides according to customary law (Turkish Civil Code art. 1 [2]). A local custom on who keeps wedding jewellery can therefore change the outcome.
• Personal property: Assets a spouse acquires by inheritance or otherwise free of charge are by law personal property, kept separate from the acquired property a spouse obtains for consideration (TCC arts. 219 and 220 [2]). In practice, jewellery received as a wedding gift is treated this way, so it is not part of the division of matrimonial property and is claimed separately.
• Proof: Anyone claiming that a particular asset belongs to one spouse must prove it (TCC art. 222(1) [2]).

2. Who owns the wedding jewellery?

The former approach: as a rule, everything to the wife

For a long time the Court of Cassation held that, unless there was a contrary agreement or custom, all wedding jewellery was deemed a gift to the wife, whoever gave it and whichever spouse it was pinned on (Yargıtay Assembly of Civil Chambers, 2017/1038 E., 2021/458 K. [3]). This is why older decisions and many online sources say "all wedding gold belongs to the bride".

The current approach

The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation changed this approach in 2024, noting that at weddings couples now also receive valuable items other than women's jewellery, intended as financial help in setting up their shared life (Yargıtay 2nd Civil Chamber, 2023/5704 E., 2024/2402 K. [1]). The court now looks at the following, in order:

3. How do you claim the jewellery back?

• Return in kind or its value: The claim is usually framed as "return of the jewellery itself, or, if that is not possible, payment of its value". If the items have been sold or melted down, the value is claimed. On matters requiring specialist or technical knowledge, such as the type, purity and value of the items, the court obtains an expert opinion (Code of Civil Procedure (HMK) art. 266 [4]). In one decision the Court of Cassation held that the items claimed must be listed one by one and their value on the filing date determined by an expert (Yargıtay 2nd Civil Chamber, 2019/1729 E., 2019/3614 K. [5]).
• Court: Family law cases are heard by the family court; where there is no family court, a civil court of first instance designated by the Council of Judges and Prosecutors hears them (Law No. 4787 arts. 2 and 4 [6]). In practice, jewellery claims between spouses are heard by the family court.
• Within the divorce case or separately: The claim can be raised in the divorce case or brought as a separate case. Even when raised in the divorce case, it is treated in practice as a separate claim.
• Venue: If raised in the divorce case, it is heard by the court hearing the divorce. A divorce case can be filed where either spouse lives or where the spouses last lived together for six months before filing (TCC art. 168 [2]). For a separate case, the general rule is the court where the defendant lives on the filing date (HMK art. 6 [4]).
• Mediation: As of the research date, family law disputes are not among the disputes for which mediation is mandatory before filing a case (Law No. 6325 art. 18/B [7]).

The "unquantified claim" has been abolished

Because the value of the jewellery often becomes clear only after an expert examination, these cases were frequently filed as unquantified claims (belirsiz alacak davası). Law No. 7589 repealed HMK art. 107, which governed this type of case, with effect from 31 July 2026; the old rule continues to apply to cases filed before that date (Law No. 7589 art. 19 and provisional art. 1(10) [8]). The same law provides that in a partial claim, where only part of a receivable is sued for, the amount may be increased once until the end of the evidence-taking stage, and the limitation period for the increased part is treated as interrupted from the filing date (HMK art. 109(4) [4]). In addition, each party may amend its pleadings once in the same case (HMK art. 176 [4]). How and for what amount the case is filed therefore needs to be considered before filing.

4. Proof: who has to prove what?

The general rule is that each party proves the facts its claim relies on (TCC art. 6 [2]; HMK art. 190 [4]). In jewellery cases this works as follows in practice.

The spouse asking for return must prove:

1. Which items, and how many, were pinned at the wedding,
2. That the items belong to them (agreement, custom or whom they were pinned on),
3. That the items stayed with, or were taken by, the other side.

The ordinary course of life: According to the Court of Cassation, the ordinary situation is that jewellery specific to women is in the wife's keeping; a wife who claims otherwise must prove that the jewellery existed and is not with her (Yargıtay 2nd Civil Chamber, 2023/5704 E., 2024/2402 K. [1]). A wife who left home voluntarily and took her belongings is therefore expected to prove that she left the jewellery behind or that it was taken from her. On the other hand, in a case where the wife had been subjected to violence and thrown out of the home, the Court of Cassation accepted that the jewellery not returned to her had stayed with the husband (Yargıtay 2nd Civil Chamber, 2010/15804 E., 2011/16116 K. [9]).

If the other side admits taking the jewellery: For example, if the husband admits selling the jewellery and spending the money on household needs or wedding debts, the burden of proof shifts. The spouse who took the jewellery must then prove that it was given to them not to be returned, or that it was sold with the wife's wish and consent and spent on shared needs; failing that, they must return it (Yargıtay 3rd Civil Chamber, 2016/15340 E., 2018/5571 K. [10]).

What evidence can be used?

5. Is there a time limit?

The law sets no specific time limit for jewellery claims, and views differ:

• One-year period: Claims arising from divorce become time-barred one year after the divorce judgment becomes final (TCC art. 178 [2]). The prevailing view in legal commentary is that a jewellery claim arises from ownership of the items rather than from the divorce, so this period does not apply.
• Return in kind vs. value: A widely held view is that a claim for return of items still held by the other side, being based on ownership, is not subject to limitation, while a claim for the value of items that have been disposed of is subject to the general ten-year period (Turkish Code of Obligations art. 146 [11]).
• During the marriage: While the marriage continues, limitation does not run on claims between spouses (Turkish Code of Obligations art. 153 [11]).

Given this uncertainty, and because evidence such as wedding videos and witnesses can become harder to obtain over time, dealing with the jewellery claim together with the divorce reduces the risk of disputes in practice.

6. How does this relate to the division of property?

Because wedding jewellery is personal property, it is not included in the division of acquired property; its return is claimed separately. Things become more complicated if the jewellery was sold and the money used to buy a house or car in the other spouse's name. That contribution to the acquisition of the other spouse's asset may also be relevant as a share in the increase in value when the matrimonial property is liquidated (TCC art. 227 [2]). That share is calculated in proportion to the contribution and on the value of the asset at liquidation. Where a wife's jewellery was sold to pay loan instalments on the husband's share of a home, the Court of Cassation accepted that she could choose between claiming her contribution in the liquidation of matrimonial property and claiming the return of the jewellery (Yargıtay 2nd Civil Chamber, 2024/6598 E., 2025/3100 K. [12]). Since the two routes can lead to different results, which one to pursue depends on the facts of the case.

7. Hypothetical example

This example is entirely hypothetical. At the wedding, four bracelets and a necklace are pinned on the bride, and six quarter gold coins and some cash on the groom. A year later the husband sells the bracelets and uses the money for car loan instalments. In the divorce case the wife asks for the bracelets back; she does not claim the necklace because she accepts that she took it with her when she left. The wedding video shows the number of bracelets, and the husband's message "I sold the bracelets" is submitted. If the husband cannot prove that the bracelets were given to him not to be returned, or sold with the wife's consent, the court may order him to pay their value. Under the current approach, the quarter coins and cash pinned on the groom may be treated as his, unless there is a contrary agreement or proven local custom.

8. Frequently asked questions

Do the same rules apply to jewellery given at the engagement?

If the engagement ends for a reason other than marriage, a separate rule applies: gifts beyond the customary that the engaged persons and their parents (or those acting as parents) gave to the other fiancé(e) can be claimed back, and if a gift cannot be returned in kind or in equivalent items, the rules on unjust enrichment apply (TCC art. 122 [2]). These claims become time-barred one year after the engagement ends (TCC art. 123). If the couple did marry, engagement jewellery is assessed on the facts of the case.

Can the husband claim the gold pinned on him?

Yes. Applying the new approach in one case, the Court of Cassation held that the 12 quarter gold coins pinned on the bride belonged to her and the 10 pinned on the groom belonged to him (Yargıtay 2nd Civil Chamber, 2024/5797 E., 2024/10388 K. [13]). A husband who says that gold pinned on him stayed with the wife must prove it.

I handed my jewellery to my mother-in-law. Can I sue her?

Whom the claim should be brought against depends on to whom, and for what purpose, the jewellery was handed over. Transactions between a daughter-in-law and her parents-in-law may also be proven by witnesses (HMK art. 203(1)(a)). The handover itself must still be proven, and whether the case should be brought against the spouse or the in-laws, and which court has jurisdiction, needs to be assessed on the facts.

Are court fees payable on a jewellery claim?

Yes. According to the Court of Cassation, a jewellery claim raised in the divorce case is not an ancillary part of the divorce and is subject to a proportional court fee on the value of the jewellery claimed (Yargıtay 2nd Civil Chamber, 2018/7022 E., 2018/13818 K. [14]). Fee and cost advance amounts change every year, so the current tariff should be checked when filing.

If the uncontested divorce protocol says nothing about the jewellery, can a case be brought later?

It depends on the wording of the protocol. General wording such as "the parties have no further claims against each other" can lead to disputes over whether it also covers jewellery claims. Stating clearly in the protocol who keeps the jewellery reduces the risk of later disputes.