Lifetime Gifts and Equalisation Among Heirs in Turkey: Civil Code Articles 669–675

1. Equalisation prevents an advance inheritance from being counted twice

The equalisation rules address lifetime transfers that were effectively made on account of an heir’s future inheritance share. If one heir received a substantial gratuitous asset during the deceased’s lifetime and the transfer falls within Article 669, the estate calculation takes that benefit into account so that the heir does not receive the same economic value again as though the lifetime transfer never occurred.

Equalisation is not a general power to reverse every gift made during life. The legal character, recipient, purpose and the deceased’s instructions matter. The first question is whether the transfer falls within the statutory equalisation regime, not simply whether another heir considers it unfair.

The mechanism is especially important where a parent transferred real estate, business capital or paid a major debt for one child while retaining other assets until death.

2. Article 669 applies between legal heirs

Article 669 states that legal heirs are obliged toward one another to return gratuitous lifetime transfers received from the deceased on account of their inheritance shares. The relationship is therefore part of the eventual estate partition among legal heirs.

A testamentary beneficiary who is not a legal heir should not automatically be treated as subject to Article 669 merely because a lifetime benefit was received. The correct legal basis for any challenge must be identified separately.

The heirship certificate, family tree and applicable succession law should be established before calculating equalisation. In a cross-border estate, MÖHUK Article 20 must also be considered.

3. Article 669 specifically identifies common transfers to descendants

The second paragraph of Article 669 creates an important rule for descendants. Gratuitous transfers such as dowry, establishment capital, transfer of assets, release from debt and similar benefits are subject to equalisation unless the deceased expressly indicated otherwise.

The statutory examples are not limited to cash. A parent can provide economic value by transferring an apartment, funding a company, paying a child’s loan or releasing a debt owed to the parent.

For overseas families, the transfer may have occurred outside Türkiye. Preserve the foreign bank, property or corporate documents because the factual value and legal character of the benefit may still be relevant to the Turkish estate calculation where Turkish succession law applies.

4. The deceased can expressly exclude a descendant’s transfer from equalisation

Article 669 makes the descendant rule subject to the deceased’s express indication to the contrary. This means evidence of the deceased’s intention can determine whether a major lifetime transfer was intended as an advance against inheritance or as a benefit outside equalisation.

The safest evidence is clear written language at the time of the transfer. A later family recollection that “father said it was a gift” may be contested and should not be treated as equal to an express documented instruction without evaluating the evidence.

Even where equalisation is excluded, reserved-share and reduction rules remain separate. A deceased cannot use an equalisation instruction as a magic phrase that automatically defeats every mandatory inheritance protection.

5. Article 670 transfers the equalisation burden when an heir loses heir status

Article 670 addresses the situation where an heir loses heirship before or after the succession opens. The obligation to return can pass to the heirs who replace that person, in proportion to the increase in their inheritance shares.

This prevents the equalisation mechanism from being defeated merely because the original recipient no longer participates in the estate. The family tree after the loss of status must be compared with the original transfer.

Cases involving renunciation, unworthiness or another loss of heirship should therefore be modelled twice: first the original heirship position and then the substitution that Article 670 makes relevant.

6. Article 671 gives the obligated heir a choice: return in kind or deduction

An heir subject to equalisation may return the benefit in kind or have its value deducted from the inheritance share. Article 671 expressly allows the deduction even if the value exceeds the inheritance share.

Return in kind can be practical where the asset still exists and can be restored to the estate. Deduction can be more practical where the property was sold, transformed or integrated into the heir’s finances.

The election should be analysed together with taxes, title status and the estate’s liquidity. An economically efficient method must still comply with the statutory rights of the other heirs.

7. Article 672 regulates a lifetime benefit greater than the heir’s share

If the lifetime benefit exceeds the recipient’s inheritance share, Article 672 allows the excess to escape equalisation if the heir proves that the deceased intended the excess to remain with that heir.

The burden of proving that intention matters. The recipient should produce the gift deed, transfer documents, written statements or other reliable evidence showing that the deceased intended the beneficiary to keep the excess rather than account for it against the estate.

Article 672 expressly preserves the other heirs’ reduction rights. A successful proof of intent in the equalisation analysis therefore does not automatically defeat a reserved-share reduction claim.

8. Article 673 uses the value at the time of equalisation

Article 673 states that equalisation is performed according to the value of the benefit at the time of equalisation. This is a concrete valuation rule and can materially change the calculation where property values rose after the lifetime transfer.

For real estate, a historical purchase price is therefore not necessarily the equalisation value. A professional valuation can be necessary to establish the current or legally relevant value at the equalisation stage.

The valuation should identify the exact asset and condition. Renovations paid by the recipient, partial transfers and changes in zoning can require separate factual analysis rather than a simple internet estimate.

9. Article 673 applies unjust-enrichment rules to benefits, losses, income and expenses

The second paragraph of Article 673 directs that unjust-enrichment rules apply between heirs regarding benefits and losses, income and expenses. The calculation can therefore extend beyond a single headline property value.

For a transferred apartment, relevant questions can include rent received, necessary expenses, taxes and improvements, depending on the legal classification and facts. The parties should preserve records instead of attempting to reconstruct years of cash flow after litigation begins.

A spreadsheet can organise the numbers, but each entry should be supported by bank statements, invoices, rental contracts or official records.

10. Article 674 limits equalisation of education and training expenses

Expenses incurred for a child’s education and training create a return obligation only to the extent they exceed the customary measure, unless the deceased’s contrary intention is proved. Ordinary education support is therefore not automatically treated like establishment capital or transfer of a major asset.

The customary measure depends on context and must be evaluated factually. Tuition, living costs and professional training should be separated rather than aggregated without analysis.

Article 674 also provides that children who have not completed their education or who have disabilities receive an equitable payment in partition. This is a distinct fairness rule within the partition process.

11. Article 675 excludes ordinary gifts and customary marriage expenses

Ordinary gifts and customary expenses made on marriage are not subject to equalisation under Article 675. The statute prevents everyday family generosity from turning into an estate-accounting dispute.

For descendants’ marriages, dowry expenses within customary limits are presumed to have been intended to remain outside equalisation. A large property transfer labelled “wedding gift” should still be examined against the actual value and statutory standard rather than relying solely on the label.

The scale of the deceased’s estate, family practice and the economic nature of the transfer can all be relevant to whether an expense was genuinely ordinary or customary.

12. Equalisation and reduction are separate remedies

Equalisation under Articles 669–675 adjusts lifetime benefits among legal heirs during partition. A reduction action protects reserved shares against dispositions that exceed the deceased’s disposable portion. The same lifetime transfer can raise both questions, but the legal tests are different.

Article 671 and Article 672 expressly preserve reduction rights. Counsel should therefore avoid ending the analysis after deciding that a transfer is or is not equalised.

The reserved-share framework is explained in Reserved Shares in Turkish Inheritance Law.

13. Foreign transfers require an asset-by-asset applicable-law review

MÖHUK Article 20 generally applies the deceased’s national law to succession while expressly applying Turkish law to immovable property located in Türkiye. An international family may therefore face different legal systems across the estate.

A transfer made from a foreign bank account or involving foreign real estate should not automatically be forced into Turkish Article 669 without first determining the law governing the relevant succession issue. Conversely, foreign location does not make evidence irrelevant where the transfer affects a Turkish-law estate calculation.

For the conflict-of-laws framework, see Turkish Inheritance Law for Foreigners: MÖHUK Article 20.

14. Build a transfer ledger before starting a family dispute

List every major lifetime transfer by date, recipient, value at transfer, current value, stated purpose, source document and whether the deceased expressly addressed equalisation. Attach deeds, bank transfers, debt-release documents, company capital records and correspondence.

Then classify each item: ordinary gift, customary marriage expense, education cost, descendant benefit presumed subject to equalisation, or another gratuitous transfer on account of an inheritance share. Do not begin with the conclusion and search only for supporting facts.

Foreign documents may require authentication and certified Turkish translation for court use. Bakırci & Keskin Law Office has one physical office in Mersin and coordinates inheritance matters throughout Türkiye from Mersin.

Conclusion

Lifetime gifts and equalisation among heirs in Turkey are governed by Civil Code Articles 669–675. Article 669 requires legal heirs to account for qualifying gratuitous lifetime transfers and creates a strong descendant rule for dowry, establishment capital, asset transfers and debt releases. Articles 671–673 regulate how the benefit is returned and valued. Articles 674–675 protect ordinary education support, ordinary gifts and customary marriage expenses from automatic equalisation. Cross-border families should document the deceased’s intention, current value and applicable succession law before calculating the final estate shares.