Was Your Divorce Petition Rejected? Your Right to Divorce Again Through De Facto Separation (Now Only 1 Year!)

Every year in Turkey, thousands of divorce petitions are rejected by the courts on the grounds that sufficient fault or evidence could not be established. So if the parties are still living apart after the case is dismissed, is the marriage legally destined to last forever? The Turkish Civil Code (TMK) gives a clear answer to this question: a divorce action based on de facto separation (actual separation). What is more, an important legislative amendment made in 2024 shortened the waiting period required to use this route. In this article, we explain when and how a new divorce action can be filed after a rejected divorce case, and why fault and financial consequences are critical in this process.

Why This Matters

Even if the marital union has effectively ended, if one of the spouses refuses to consent to a divorce, or if the first case was rejected due to insufficient fault or evidence, the other spouse may be condemned to remain "married on paper" for years. Turkish Civil Code (TMK) Article 166/4 (popularly known as "166/son" — "166/final paragraph") was enacted precisely to resolve this deadlock. This provision is a powerful legal tool, described in legal doctrine as an "absolute ground for divorce," which allows the court to grant a divorce without any examination of fault, provided only that certain formal conditions are met.

Summary of the Situation

A person (the claimant) continues to live separately from their spouse after a divorce case filed years earlier was rejected because fault could not be proven. In the intervening period, the parties never came back together to re-establish a shared life. The claimant has, for example, moved to another city for work, and the other spouse has not joined them. The claimant is now willing to leave the family home to the other party, but does not want to face claims for maintenance (alimony), compensation or any other division of assets.

In scenarios of this kind, two questions matter: (1) How long must one wait before filing a new case? (2) Against whom will the court attribute "fault" for the cause of the separation?

The Legal Issue

The Waiting Period Has Changed: From 3 Years to 1 Year

Under TMK Article 166/4, the following conditions must be met together in order to file a divorce action based on de facto separation:

• A previous divorce case must have been filed on any ground and rejected,
• That rejection decision must have become final,
• The period prescribed by law must have elapsed from the date the decision became final,
• A shared life must not have been re-established during that period.

When the Code first entered into force, this period was set at 3 years. However, by an amendment made through Article 13 of Law No. 7532 dated 14.11.2024, this period was reduced to 1 year. In other words, as of today, a de facto separation action can be filed only 1 year after the rejected divorce case becomes final, provided a shared life has not been re-established. This means the process can move much faster and must absolutely be taken into account when building a current litigation strategy.

Fault Is Irrelevant to the Divorce Itself — But It Still Has Consequences

The most critical point emphasized in legal doctrine and in the case law of the Yargıtay (Court of Cassation) is this: in a de facto separation action, the fault of the parties is not examined for the purpose of granting the divorce. Who filed the first case, or which party was found at fault leading to that case's rejection, cannot be examined by the court in the new action. The legislator has accepted that once the time condition is met, the marital union is deemed to have effectively collapsed.

However, this does not affect maintenance and compensation claims. Even if the divorce itself is granted without any fault assessment, the fault of the parties comes back into play when claims for poverty alimony and pecuniary/moral compensation are examined.

What Does the Yargıtay (Court of Cassation) Say?

The settled case law on the subject can be summarized as follows:

• Yargıtay General Assembly of Civil Chambers, E. 2017/1286, K. 2019/142, T. 2019: In de facto separation cases, the burden of proof lies with the claimant; the ex officio investigation principle does not apply, and a case filed without evidence will be rejected.
• Yargıtay 2nd Civil Chamber, E. 2011/1238, K. 2011/23139, T. 2011 and E. 2023/869, K. 2023/1489, T. 2023: The claimant who filed the first case and thereby caused the de facto separation is deemed "entirely at fault."
• Yargıtay 2nd Civil Chamber, E. 2023/9957, K. 2024/6399, T. 2024: The conduct of a party who leaves their spouse and settles in another city may be assessed by the court as faulty conduct and may give rise to compensation in favor of the other party.
• Yargıtay 2nd Civil Chamber, E. 2023/6758, K. 2023/4409, T. 2023 and E. 2011/4812, K. 2012/1919, T. 2012: It has been emphasized that, against the party deemed entirely at fault for having filed the earlier case, poverty alimony and compensation should be awarded in favor of the other spouse, taking into account social-economic circumstances and equity.
• Yargıtay 2nd Civil Chamber, E. 2022/5304, K. 2022/7639, T. 2022: It has been stated that address/residence records alone may not be sufficient to prove de facto separation, and that additional concrete evidence (such as witnesses) may be needed.

The literature (Ekici, 2023) also draws attention to an important point: where a divorce is granted under TMK Article 166/4, the date on which the statutory matrimonial property regime ends is deemed to be the date the first divorce case was filed. This means that income and assets acquired after the first case was filed may be treated as personal property, which can create a decisive advantage (or disadvantage) in the liquidation of the property regime.

Points to Watch

• The risk of "coming back together": If, after the rejection decision, the parties came together even once with the intention of living as husband and wife, the period is interrupted and the case will be rejected. However, compulsory, short-term contacts due to illness, the children's needs or special occasions are not treated as falling within this scope.
• Evidence of proof: Residence (MERNİS) records, civil registry records and witness statements are valid evidence; however, an address record alone may not be sufficient.
• Building the fault narrative is strategically important: A party who does not want to pay maintenance/compensation must establish, with concrete evidence, that the real cause of the separation originated from the other party (for example, that despite relocating for a legitimate reason — such as work or public service — the other spouse avoided re-establishing a shared life).
• Drafting the petition correctly: The petition must clearly state the rejection and finalization dates of the previous case, and the legal ground must be expressly identified as TMK Article 166/4.

Conclusion: What Should You Do?

A divorce action based on de facto separation is a fairly safe legal route for people who have long been living apart in practice and who wish to divorce without the other party's consent; however, calculating the period correctly and managing the fault issue properly are of great importance.

• Establish precisely the date on which the previous rejection decision became final.
• Check whether the 1-year period has elapsed since finalization (for decisions that became final after 14.11.2024).
• Gather concrete evidence showing that a shared life was not established during this period (residence records, witnesses, correspondence).
• Assess the maintenance and compensation risks in advance; prepare evidence that will strengthen your file on the question of fault.
• Since the process is complex and requires strategic decisions, be sure to seek support from a family law attorney before filing the case.