Claims for the Return of Wedding Jewelry

A jewelry (ziynet) claim is a lawsuit filed to recover jewelry such as gold, bracelets, necklaces and earrings given during the marriage or at the wedding, either in kind or, if that is not possible, by payment of their value. In practice, it most often arises together with a divorce case or after the divorce. The jewelry may have been sold during the marriage, deposited in a bank, entrusted to family, or left behind at the home during the separation; each scenario has different consequences in terms of proof.

In most of these cases, the dispute is less about who the jewelry belongs to and more about who currently holds it and under what conditions it was given. For this reason, the sequence of events and the available evidence should be carefully assessed before filing a lawsuit.

Who owns the jewelry given at the wedding?

For many years, the Court of Cassation treated jewelry given at the wedding as a gift to the wife, regardless of whom it was pinned on, unless there was an agreement to the contrary or a local custom. In 2024, the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation changed this approach. Under current practice, the court first looks at whether there is an agreement between the parties; if not, it looks at any local custom that has been alleged and proven; if there is neither, items of economic value given to the husband and wife are, as a rule, considered to belong to whomever they were given. Items specific to one gender (for example, a men's watch or a women's bracelet) are considered to belong to the spouse of that gender, regardless of whom they were given to. For this reason, a detailed determination of who received what from the wedding records has become even more important.

Jewelry deemed to belong to a spouse is considered personal property, since under Article 220 of the Turkish Civil Code it falls under items serving solely the personal use of one spouse. Therefore, jewelry is kept separate from the assets subject to division under the regime of participation in acquired property, and is claimed through a separate receivable claim. For the general framework on the liquidation of the property regime, you can read our article on property division in divorce.

Who bears the burden of proof?

The burden of proof often determines the outcome of jewelry cases. The principles that stand out in the Court of Cassation's practice can be summarized as follows:

• Since jewelry consists of items that are easily carried and hidden, it is, as a rule, presumed to be on the wife's person or within her sphere of control.
• The burden of proving that the jewelry was taken by the husband or remained in his possession lies with the wife requesting its return.
• If the wife proves that the jewelry was handed over to the husband, or if the husband admits to having taken it, the burden shifts to the husband to prove that the jewelry was given without any obligation to return it; the fact that it was sold for the needs of the marital union does not, by itself, remove the obligation to return it.
• A wife taking her jewelry with her when leaving the home is considered consistent with the ordinary course of life; however, circumstances such as being forced out of the home or a sudden departure may change this assessment.

These principles provide the general framework; the consistency of witness statements and the documents may change the outcome in a specific case.

What evidence can be used?

• Wedding and engagement photographs and video recordings,
• Testimony of the people who gave the jewelry and of wedding guests,
• Jeweler invoices, sale receipts and gold purchase-and-sale records,
• Bank records, safe deposit box and gold account activity,
• Documents showing that the jewelry was sold and used to pay a debt or to buy a vehicle or a home,
• Messages and correspondence between the spouses.

Video recordings are frequently subject to expert examination to determine the type and quantity of the jewelry given. The type, purity and weight in grams of each item should be listed in the petition in as much detail as possible.

How the claim is framed: return in kind or value

In the petition, the return in kind of the jewelry is requested and, if that is not possible, payment of its value. If the jewelry has been sold or otherwise disposed of, return in kind is no longer possible, so the judgment is based on its value. Because of fluctuations in gold prices, the date on which the value is calculated and whether the claim can be increased during the proceedings are important; these matters should be assessed according to the specifics of the case. A court fee is charged based on the value of the claim; the current fee schedule is set anew each year.

The lawsuit process step by step

1. Preliminary assessment: A detailed list is drawn up of the jewelry, who gave it, what happened to it during the marriage and where it is now.
2. Gathering evidence: Wedding records, invoices, bank statements and witnesses are identified.
3. Petition: The jewelry is itemized by type, quantity and weight in grams; the claims for return in kind and for value are framed together.
4. Investigation: Witnesses are heard, and the wedding records and the value of the jewelry are examined by an expert.
5. Judgment and appeal: The judgment can be challenged by an appeal (istinaf) and, if the conditions are met, by a further appeal (temyiz).

Competent court, time limits and timing of the lawsuit

Because a jewelry claim arises from family law, it is heard by the family court, or, where there is no family court, by the civil court of first instance acting as a family court. The lawsuit may be filed together with the divorce case or as a separate case after the divorce. Raising it together with the divorce case offers the practical advantage of hearing the same witnesses in a single proceeding.

In the Court of Cassation's practice, a jewelry claim is not considered ancillary to the divorce, so it is not subject to the one-year limitation period (Turkish Civil Code Art. 178) prescribed for compensation and alimony claims tied to divorce. A claim for return of the jewelry in kind is based on the right of ownership and does not become time-barred; however, if the jewelry has been disposed of, the general limitation provisions may come into play for a claim for its value. Even so, as time passes, witnesses' memories fade and documents become harder to obtain; it is beneficial to file the lawsuit without delay.

Points to keep in mind

• If the jewelry was expressly waived in an uncontested divorce protocol, filing a separate lawsuit afterward is, as a rule, not possible.
• A claim that the jewelry was entrusted to the husband's family must be examined separately in terms of to whom it was entrusted and who the opposing party will be.
• Jewelry given at the engagement and jewelry given at the wedding may be subject to different legal assessments; if the engagement is broken off, the return of gifts is addressed under the Turkish Civil Code's provisions on engagement.
• If the jewelry is kept in a safe deposit box or a gold account, whose name the account is in and who has access are decisive for proof.
• If it is claimed that the jewelry was spent on a shared need, the question is whether it was an unconditional gift or a contribution to be repaid.

Every case is unique; the same set of facts may end differently depending on the nature of the witnesses and documents. The specific situation must be assessed separately.

How our office can help

In jewelry claims, we provide support in gathering evidence before filing, drawing up a detailed list of the jewelry, correctly framing the claim as return in kind and value, and following the expert examination. We jointly assess, based on the circumstances of the case, whether the claim should be raised together with the divorce case or separately.