KÜHEYLAN HUKUK
Disinheritance (Iskat) and Deprivation of Inheritance: In Which Cases Does the Heir Lose His Rights? Legislation and jurisprudence information on the conditions of disinheritance, burden of proof, annulment action and reasons for disinheritance have been compiled as of October 2026. Decision citations were taken from the decisions of the 1st and 7th Civil Chambers of the Supreme Court of Appeals dated 2025-2026.
In Turkish law, there are two different ways for the heir to not receive a share of the inheritance. Disinheritance (iskat) is when the testator removes his reserved heir from inheritance, through a death-related act such as a will, for the reasons listed in the law (serious crime or significant violation of family law obligations) (TMK art. 510). Deprivation of inheritance is the law's elimination of inheritance, regardless of the will of the testator, in cases of serious acts such as deliberately killing the testator (TCC Art. 578). For the dismissal to be valid, the reason for the dismissal must be clearly written in the disposition. If the heir objects, the burden of proving the existence of the reason belongs to the person benefiting from the exclusion (TCC Art. 512). If the reason cannot be proven, the disposition is carried out except for the reserved share of the heir.
The two institutions are often confused in everyday language. However, their sources, conditions and results are different.
For whom Heirs with reserved shares only Every heir and beneficiary of death-related savings
Reasons Serious crime against the testator or his relatives; significant breach of family law obligations Acts such as deliberately killing or attempting to kill the testator, forcibly preventing him from making savings, and deliberately destroying the will.
Amnesty The testator may revoke this will. It disappears with the forgiveness of the testator.
descendant effect The descendants of the issuer may request the reserved share. The descendants of the deprived person inherit as if he were dead.
Exclusion from inheritance must be based on one of the two reasons clearly listed in the law (TMK article 510).
The heir commits a serious crime against the testator or one of his relatives.
Significant failure of the heir to fulfill his obligations arising from family law towards the testator or members of his family.
In addition, removal can only be made with a death-related disposition, and the reason for dismissal must be clearly stated in the disposition (TMK article 512/1). An exclusion for which the reason is not stated has no consequences for the reserved heir. The formal requirements of the will are discussed in a separate guide.
The law also includes a third situation. A descendant who has a certificate of inability to pay debts may be excluded from inheritance for half of his reserved share. In this case, the inherited half must be allocated to the born and future children of the person excluded from inheritance (TMK article 513).
A person who is disinherited cannot receive a share of the inheritance and cannot file a lawsuit for criticism. Unless there is a contrary disposition, the share of the inheritance is left to the descendants, if any, or to the legal heirs, as if that person had died before the testator (TCC Art. 511). The descendants of the issuer may request their reserved share. Reserved share rates are regulated in TMK Article 506.
If the person who has been excluded from inheritance objects to the exclusion, the heir or the creditor of the will who has benefited from the exclusion must prove that the reason actually exists (TCC Art. 512/2). The 7th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals repeated this principle in its decision dated 23.02.2026 (E.2025/2901, K.2026/960) and stated that even if the reason cannot be proven, the disposition does not become completely invalid and will be fulfilled except for the reserved share of the heir whose removal is deemed inappropriate.
Current examples showing how the results are shaped are as follows.
Supreme Court of Appeals 7th HD, E.2025/551 K.2025/4936, 24.11.2025 The heir does not pay his debts, frequently scolds the father and disrupts the family unity. Living in the same house does not mean forgiveness; The reason for dismissal was found to be justified
Supreme Court of Appeals 7th HD, E.2024/4654 K.2025/2660, 15.05.2025 Dismissal on the grounds that the spouse did not take care of the spouse during the illness It should be investigated whether the reasons are of a quality and quantity that can be considered as negligence.
Supreme Court of Appeals 7th HD, E.2024/4453 K.2025/3320, 30.06.2025 Unproven reason for dismissal Savings are canceled in proportion to the reserved share
Supreme Court of Appeals 7th HD, E.2025/955 K.2025/4944, 24.11.2025 The place of the descendants of the aborted heir in the case The decision made without directing hostility towards the descendants is annulled.
Supreme Court of Appeals 1st HD, E.2026/888 K.2026/1346, 23.02.2026 Filing of a suit for collusion by the aborted heir There is no active hostility in the collusion case filed without canceling the iskat or putting it forward through defense.
The final decision is of great importance in practice. In the file from Çanakkale, the heir claimed that his mother transferred her immovable properties to the defendants in a collusive manner, but her mother disinherited her by the will. The Regional Court of Justice rejected the case due to the absence of active hostility, stating that the annulment of the invalidation was not requested and that it was not put forward as a defense to the invalidity, and the Supreme Court approved this decision. In other words, the excluded heir cannot pursue an effective lawsuit against other heirs without first resorting to legal action against the exclusion.
An annulment lawsuit against cancellation must be filed within 1 year, starting from the date on which the plaintiff learns the disposition, the reason for the annulment, and that he is the rightful owner. In any case, in the case of wills, 10 years from the date of opening of the will are valid for good-faith defendants and 20 years for non-good-faith defendants (TCC Art. 559/1). Invalidity can always be claimed through defense (TMK article 559/2). This rule provides a last defense for the heir who has missed the deadline.
The reasons for deprivation of inheritance are listed in TMK Article 578. These people cannot inherit, nor can they acquire rights through death-related disposition.
Those who deliberately and unlawfully kill or attempt to kill the testator; those who deliberately and unlawfully render the testator permanently incapable of making death-related savings; those who enable or prevent the testator from making savings or reneging on savings through deception, coercion or intimidation; those who deliberately and unlawfully eliminate or disrupt a death-related disposition in a situation and time where the testator can no longer do it again.
Deprivation only affects the deprived person, and his descendants inherit as if he had died before the decedent (TMK article 579). In its decision dated 01.12.2025 (E.2025/1473, K.2025/5099), the 7th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals examined the debate on whether acts of forgery can be considered as a reason for deprivation within the scope of TMK Article 578/4 and whether the descendants of the heir who is considered deprived are a party to the case. The testator's forgiveness eliminates the deprivation, but the decision of the criminal court may not be binding on the civil judge.
R.D. disinherited his son Kemal with the notary will he prepared in 2024. As a reason, he wrote that Kemal did not take care of his father for a long time, left the house and insulted his father. R.D. He died in 2026 and his will was opened in the civil court of peace. Kemal has two children.
Since the reason for exclusion is clearly written in the will, the exclusion is valid in terms of form. If Kemal objects, the burden of proof falls on the heirs who benefit from the iskat. Witnesses, health records, message and payment records become evidence. If the reason cannot be proven, Kemal receives his reserved share (half of his legal share). Kemal must file an annulment lawsuit within 1 year. In addition, even if Kemal's iskat is considered completely valid, his children may request their reserved shares.
Can a testator disinherit an heir without giving any reason?
No. Removal without reason does not affect the reserved heir. Savings are carried out excluding the heir's reserved share.
Can disinheritance be done against siblings?
Since siblings do not have a reserved share, the testator can exclude them from sharing in the will. This is not considered a miss in the legal sense.
Can the heir file a lawsuit for retaliation after dismissal?
In case of valid dismissal, a retaliation lawsuit cannot be filed (TMK article 511). First, the rejection must be canceled or it must be claimed that it is not valid.
Can the abducted heir file a collusion lawsuit?
The 1st Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals accepts that this case will be rejected without requesting the annulment of the dismissal or putting forward a defense.
Can the testator revoke his will?
Yes. He can cancel the removal by making a new testamentary disposition or by invalidating the previous will.
Opening the case of collusion of the deceased while being acquitted without a request for annulment
Relying solely on verbal statements for proof and not collecting health and payment records
Disinheritance and disinheritance are institutions that can lead to loss of rights for both the testator and the heir, and are strictly bound to the rules of time and proof. Küheylan Law Firm creates a legal framework that protects the rights of both parties, from legally establishing the reason for exclusion in the will to filing cancellation cases, from preparing the proof plan to time tracking. When a problem with iskat arises, the first step is to legally evaluate the date of opening of the will and the 1-year period.
Important Legal Notice: The information contained in this guide is for general information purposes and does not constitute a legal opinion. The outcome may vary depending on the specific circumstances of each concrete case, the nature of the documents in the file, and the legislative provisions at the relevant date. It is recommended that the process be carried out with the support of a lawyer, in order not to miss the limiting deadlines and to prevent procedural errors.
KÜHEYLAN HUKUK