International divorce disputes do not necessarily end when the divorce judgment becomes final. In many cross-border cases, the more difficult stage begins afterwards: collecting spousal maintenance, child support, compensation or other monetary awards from a former spouse who lives, works or holds assets in another country.

A maintenance order issued in Türkiye does not automatically allow the creditor to seize a bank account in Germany, garnish a salary in the United Kingdom or attach property in the United States. Likewise, a foreign divorce judgment containing financial obligations may require additional recognition or enforcement proceedings before it can be executed against assets located in Türkiye.

The central question in international maintenance cases is therefore not simply whether a person has a valid claim. The real question is:

In which country can the judgment be enforced, under which international instrument, and against which assets or income?

For individuals involved in international marriages, this distinction may determine whether a maintenance or compensation award remains merely a judgment on paper or becomes an effectively recoverable financial claim.

1. Financial Claims Arising from Divorce under Turkish Law

Turkish family law recognises several different financial consequences of divorce. Each should be distinguished because the international enforcement mechanism applicable to one type of claim may not necessarily apply to another.

Under Article 174 of the Turkish Civil Code, a spouse who is innocent or less at fault and whose existing or expected interests have been damaged by the divorce may claim appropriate pecuniary compensation from the spouse at fault. A spouse whose personality rights have been violated by the events leading to divorce may additionally claim non-pecuniary compensation.

Article 175 regulates spousal maintenance following divorce, commonly referred to under Turkish law as yoksulluk nafakası. A spouse who would fall into poverty as a result of divorce may claim maintenance according to the other spouse’s financial capacity, provided that the claimant is not more seriously at fault. The statute does not require fault on the part of the maintenance debtor.

Where children are concerned, Turkish courts may also order the parent who does not have custody to contribute to the child’s maintenance, education, accommodation, healthcare and other needs through child support (iştirak nafakası).

These claims must not be treated as one single category in international enforcement proceedings. Maintenance obligations benefit from specific international conventions designed to facilitate cross-border recovery, while divorce compensation and certain other monetary awards will often have to be pursued through ordinary recognition and enforcement procedures.

2. Which Law Governs Maintenance in an International Divorce?

The existence of a foreign element changes the legal analysis.

Türkiye’s Law No. 5718 on Private International Law and International Civil Procedure (Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk ve Usul Hukuku Hakkında Kanun – MÖHUK) establishes the conflict-of-laws framework.

Under Article 14 of MÖHUK, divorce and its consequences are, as a starting point, governed by the spouses’ common national law. If the spouses have different nationalities, their common habitual residence law applies; if no such common habitual residence exists, Turkish law applies. The same rule expressly applies to maintenance claims between divorced spouses. Temporary measures, however, are governed by Turkish law when requested before Turkish courts.

MÖHUK also contains a general provision concerning maintenance. Article 19 provides that maintenance claims are governed by the law of the habitual residence of the maintenance creditor.

Consequently, international maintenance litigation may require a distinction between maintenance between former spouses, maintenance arising from other family relationships, and child-related maintenance.

This choice-of-law analysis should be performed separately from jurisdiction and enforcement. A Turkish court having jurisdiction over the dispute does not necessarily mean that Turkish substantive law will govern every financial issue.

3. Obtaining a Judgment Is Different from Enforcing It

One of the most important principles in international litigation is the distinction between:

jurisdiction,
applicable law,
recognition, and
enforcement.

A court may validly issue a maintenance or compensation judgment, but its coercive power generally ends at the borders of the state in which it exercises jurisdiction.

For example, suppose a Turkish family court orders a former spouse to pay monthly child support. If the debtor lives in Türkiye and receives a Turkish salary, enforcement may normally proceed through the Turkish enforcement system.

But if the debtor works in France, owns an apartment in Germany and keeps most funds in a bank account abroad, a Turkish enforcement office cannot simply send an attachment order directly to those foreign assets.

The judgment normally has to be made enforceable in the country where the debtor or assets are located.

This is where international conventions and the domestic law of the requested state become decisive.

4. The 2007 Hague Child Support Convention

One of the most important instruments in this area is the Hague Convention of 23 November 2007 on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance.

Its purpose is to create an effective system for international recovery of family maintenance by establishing cooperation between contracting states, facilitating applications for maintenance, enabling recognition and enforcement of maintenance decisions and requiring effective enforcement measures.

The Convention entered into force for Türkiye on 1 February 2017.

This is particularly important for Turkish citizens and foreign nationals involved in family disputes connected with Türkiye because the Convention can significantly reduce the procedural burden associated with pursuing a maintenance debtor abroad.

5. Türkiye Has Adopted a Broad Approach to the Hague Convention

Türkiye made particularly significant declarations when ratifying the Convention.

Türkiye declared that maintenance protection would extend to children who have not reached the age of 25 where their education continues.

Türkiye also declared that the entire Convention would extend to maintenance obligations involving:

• spouses,
• mentally or physically disabled children unable to support themselves regardless of age, and
• mothers and fathers in need of care.

This makes the Convention relevant not only to ordinary child-support disputes but also to a broader category of family-maintenance claims involving Türkiye.

However, practitioners must still examine whether the other state involved is a Contracting Party and what declarations, reservations or extensions that state has made.

The scope of an international convention cannot safely be determined solely by looking at Turkish law.

6. Central Authorities and International Cooperation

A major advantage of the 2007 Hague system is that a maintenance creditor is not necessarily expected to navigate the foreign legal system alone.

Contracting states designate Central Authorities that cooperate in international maintenance cases.

In Türkiye, the Directorate General for Foreign Relations and European Union Affairs of the Ministry of Justice acts as the Central Authority in international maintenance recovery matters. Its Maintenance Bureau handles both applications sent from Türkiye to foreign states and applications received in Türkiye from abroad.

According to the Ministry of Justice, these mechanisms may include steps such as:

• transmitting applications to foreign Central Authorities;
• bringing proceedings for recognition and enforcement;
• commencing enforcement proceedings;
• assisting with obtaining maintenance decisions;
• facilitating service of documents;
• locating the debtor;
• investigating assets;
• assisting with evidence;
• facilitating settlement; and
• taking measures intended to secure recovery of maintenance.

This institutional cooperation is one of the principal differences between international maintenance enforcement and the enforcement of an ordinary commercial debt.

7. How Is a Turkish Maintenance Judgment Enforced Abroad?

Consider a typical example.

A Turkish court orders a former spouse to pay:

TRY 30,000 monthly spousal maintenance and TRY 20,000 monthly child support.

The debtor subsequently moves to Germany and earns a salary there.

The creditor cannot generally obtain an effective German salary attachment merely by commencing Turkish enforcement proceedings.

Instead, the lawyer must first identify the international mechanism governing recognition and enforcement between Türkiye and Germany.

Where the Hague Convention applies, the Turkish maintenance decision may be transmitted through the Central Authority mechanism for recognition and enforcement in the requested state.

After the Turkish decision becomes enforceable under the law of the requested state, local enforcement measures may potentially be used against the debtor’s:

salary, bank accounts, movable assets, real estate, tax refunds or other attachable property, depending on the domestic law of that country.

The enforcement stage is governed primarily by the law of the country in which enforcement takes place.

Therefore, an international divorce lawyer should ask a practical question at the very beginning:

Where does the debtor actually receive income and where are the assets located?

That question may be more important for recovery than the debtor’s nationality.

8. What Documents May Be Required?

International maintenance recovery is highly document-dependent.

Türkiye’s declarations under the Hague Convention indicate that applications may require documents including a certified copy of the maintenance decision, information regarding service of proceedings on the debtor, identifying information concerning the parties, documentation concerning the child and parentage, evidence of continued education where relevant, information concerning indexation and interest, authorisation for the Central Authority and a statement showing accumulated maintenance arrears and payments already made.

In practice, depending on the requested state, documents may also require:

apostille or another form of authentication where applicable,

certified translations,

proof that the judgment is final or enforceable,

proof that the debtor was properly served,

a calculation of outstanding arrears,

the creditor’s bank details,

the debtor’s last known address,

employment details,

and available information concerning assets.

Incomplete files are one of the most common reasons cross-border recovery becomes unnecessarily slow.

9. Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Maintenance Judgments in Türkiye

The reverse situation is equally common.

A maintenance creditor may obtain a divorce or maintenance judgment in another country while the debtor subsequently moves to Türkiye or owns assets here.

In principle, foreign judgments cannot automatically be executed in Türkiye merely because they were validly issued abroad.

Article 50 of MÖHUK provides that a final foreign civil judgment may be executed in Türkiye following an enforcement decision by the competent Turkish court.

Articles 53 and 54 establish procedural requirements and enforcement conditions.

Relevant considerations include whether:

the foreign judgment is final,

the required certified judgment and translations have been submitted,

reciprocity exists where required,

the matter does not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of Turkish courts,

the foreign judgment is not manifestly contrary to Turkish public policy,

and the defendant’s fundamental procedural rights—particularly proper service and representation—were respected.

International conventions may modify or simplify this framework where they apply because MÖHUK expressly preserves Türkiye’s obligations arising from international treaties.

10. Recognition Is Not Always the Same as Enforcement

This distinction is especially important in divorce cases.

Recognition essentially allows the foreign judgment to produce legal effects in Türkiye.

Enforcement, by contrast, enables the creditor to use state coercive measures to collect money or compel performance.

A foreign divorce judgment may therefore require only recognition for certain civil-status consequences, while its provisions ordering payment of maintenance or compensation may require enforcement.

For example, recognising that two persons are legally divorced is conceptually different from attaching a debtor’s Turkish bank account for EUR 80,000 awarded as financial compensation in the same foreign judgment.

This distinction must be considered when drafting the relief requested from the Turkish court.

11. What About Compensation Awarded in the Divorce?

Maintenance and divorce compensation should not be confused.

The Hague maintenance system is designed principally for family maintenance obligations.

A monetary award for material or moral compensation arising from divorce may not qualify as maintenance merely because it appears in the same divorce judgment.

Therefore, where a Turkish judgment awards both:

monthly maintenance, and

a lump-sum compensation payment,

the two claims may need to be analysed separately for international enforcement purposes.

The maintenance component may benefit from an international maintenance convention, while the compensation component may have to be recognised and enforced under the general private international law rules of the country where recovery is sought.

The same issue can arise with:

property-settlement payments,

equalisation claims,

contributions arising from matrimonial property regimes,

contractual payments in a divorce settlement,

litigation costs,

and other lump-sum obligations.

The legal classification of the award is therefore critical.

12. The 1956 New York Convention

International maintenance recovery did not begin with the 2007 Hague Convention.

Türkiye also participates in the 1956 United Nations Convention on the Recovery Abroad of Maintenance, commonly known as the New York Convention.

The Convention was designed to facilitate maintenance recovery where the creditor and debtor are subject to different jurisdictions. Importantly, the remedies created by the Convention supplement rather than replace other domestic or international remedies.

Depending on the countries involved and the relevant treaty relationships, the lawyer must determine which convention, bilateral agreement or domestic recognition regime provides the most appropriate procedural route.

Treaty analysis should therefore be conducted country by country.

13. Locating the Debtor and Identifying Assets

In many cases, the greatest obstacle is not obtaining the maintenance judgment but locating assets.

A debtor may move abroad, change employers or attempt to conceal financial resources.

Effective international recovery therefore begins with an asset and income map.

Relevant information may include:

the debtor’s country of residence,

national identification or social-security information where lawfully available,

employment and employer details,

company ownership,

banking relationships,

real-estate ownership,

vehicles,

shareholdings,

business interests,

pension income,

and other receivables.

The Turkish Ministry of Justice expressly notes that international maintenance cooperation may include measures directed toward locating the debtor and investigating assets.

Nevertheless, the extent to which foreign authorities may access bank, employment or property information depends on the law of the requested jurisdiction.

14. Can the Debtor Avoid Maintenance Simply by Moving Abroad?

Generally, no.

Relocation does not extinguish an existing maintenance obligation.

What changes is the enforcement environment.

A debtor who relocates from Türkiye to another country may make ordinary Turkish enforcement measures less effective, but the debt itself does not disappear merely because the debtor crossed a border.

Depending on the countries involved, the creditor may seek recognition and enforcement abroad, recover accumulated arrears and pursue the debtor’s income or assets under the enforcement law of the foreign jurisdiction.

Likewise, moving assets from one country to another may complicate collection but does not automatically eliminate the underlying obligation.

For this reason, speed is particularly important where there is evidence suggesting imminent asset transfers.

15. Accumulated Maintenance Arrears

Cross-border cases frequently involve substantial accumulated arrears.

Suppose monthly maintenance of EUR 1,500 has not been paid for two years.

The principal arrears alone amount to EUR 36,000 before considering any applicable interest, indexation or costs.

An international enforcement file should clearly demonstrate:

the amount originally ordered,

the dates on which each instalment became due,

payments actually received,

outstanding principal,

applicable adjustment or indexation,

and interest where recoverable.

Türkiye’s Hague Convention declarations expressly contemplate the submission of a list showing accumulated maintenance debts and payments, together with information on indexation and interest where applicable.

Accurate accounting is therefore not merely an administrative convenience. It may be central to enforceability.

16. Currency and Exchange-Rate Problems

International maintenance disputes often involve multiple currencies.

For example, a Turkish judgment may order maintenance in Turkish lira while the debtor receives income in euros.

This raises questions concerning:

the date of conversion,

the applicable exchange rate,

interest,

indexation,

and the currency in which enforcement will actually occur.

The correct approach depends on the judgment itself, applicable law and the enforcement rules of the requested jurisdiction.

International divorce agreements should therefore be drafted with currency risk in mind.

Where legally appropriate, parties may consider mechanisms governing:

the currency of payment,

payment account,

payment date,

indexation,

bank charges,

and consequences of delayed payment.

A poorly drafted financial provision can generate a second dispute after the divorce itself has already been resolved.

17. International Service of Documents

Cross-border litigation also requires careful attention to service.

If the respondent lives abroad, proceedings must normally comply with applicable international service rules.

Improper service can later become a major obstacle to recognition and enforcement.

Under Article 54 of MÖHUK, procedural deficiencies involving service, representation or judgments rendered in the defendant’s absence may constitute grounds for resisting enforcement where the statutory conditions are met.

Therefore, attempting to accelerate divorce proceedings through procedurally defective foreign service can ultimately delay financial recovery for years.

International enforceability should be considered while the original proceedings are still pending, not only after judgment.

18. Child Support Requires Particular Protection

Child support has a special status because the underlying right belongs to the child, even though enforcement is commonly conducted by the custodial parent or legal representative.

The financial circumstances of the parents, the needs of the child, education expenses, healthcare costs and the child’s standard of living may become relevant when support is determined.

In an international context, additional issues may arise where:

the child lives in Türkiye but the debtor parent lives abroad;

the child moves to another country after the support judgment;

school and healthcare expenses are incurred in a foreign currency;

the debtor earns substantially more abroad;

or the existing award becomes inadequate because of inflation and exchange-rate movements.

International relocation may therefore require not only enforcement of an existing order but sometimes a separate proceeding for modification or increase of maintenance.

19. Spousal Maintenance Is More Complex Internationally

Cross-border enforcement of spousal maintenance can be more complicated than child support because the scope of international instruments is not identical in every country.

The original Hague Convention framework gives particularly strong protection to child-support claims, while the application of the Convention to broader categories of spousal maintenance may depend on the Convention provisions and declarations made by the states concerned. The European Union, for example, declared an extension of Chapters II and III to spousal support, while Türkiye has likewise made a broad declaration extending the Convention’s application to maintenance towards spouses.

Accordingly, before commencing proceedings, counsel should examine the status and declarations of both states.

20. Enforcement Strategy Should Be Planned Before the Divorce Judgment

In a purely domestic divorce case, enforcement may be regarded as a later stage.

In an international divorce, that approach can be dangerous.

A properly designed strategy should begin by identifying:

Where does the debtor live?

Where does the debtor work?

Where are the bank accounts?

Where are the immovable properties?

Which countries are parties to the relevant international conventions?

Will the judgment be recognisable and enforceable there?

Has the debtor been properly served?

Should interim measures be sought before assets are transferred?

These questions may influence how claims are formulated in the original divorce proceedings.

A judgment should not only be legally correct; where possible, it should also be structured so that it can realistically be enforced.

21. A Practical Cross-Border Recovery Roadmap

A person seeking to recover maintenance or another divorce-related financial claim from a former spouse abroad will generally need to follow a process broadly resembling the following:

1. Identify the nature of the claim: child support, spousal maintenance, compensation, property settlement or another financial award.
2. Determine where the debtor and assets are located.
3. Verify whether the judgment is final and enforceable.
4. Identify applicable international conventions or bilateral agreements.
5. Check the declarations and reservations of both states.
6. Prepare certified judgments, enforceability documents and translations.
7. Calculate arrears, interest and indexation accurately.
8. Apply through the competent Central Authority where the maintenance convention procedure is available.
9. Where no treaty mechanism applies, commence recognition and enforcement proceedings under the domestic law of the country where enforcement is sought.
10. After recognition or declaration of enforceability, pursue local enforcement measures against salary, bank accounts, property or other assets.

The correct sequence may vary significantly depending on the countries involved.

22. Why International Divorce Enforcement Requires Separate Legal Planning

One of the most costly mistakes in international family disputes is assuming that the court issuing the divorce judgment will also be capable of ensuring payment abroad.

In reality, three different legal systems may be involved in a single case.

For example:

the divorce may be heard in Türkiye,

the debtor may live in Germany,

and significant assets may be located in Switzerland.

The lawyer must therefore coordinate Turkish family law, private international law, applicable treaties and the enforcement procedures of each relevant foreign jurisdiction.

The same applies where one spouse owns international companies, receives income through foreign entities or frequently transfers residence between countries.

For high-value claims, enforcement planning should therefore begin at the same time as litigation strategy.

Conclusion: A Foreign Border Does Not End a Maintenance Obligation

The international character of a divorce can make the recovery of maintenance and financial rights more complex, but the fact that a former spouse lives abroad does not, by itself, prevent enforcement.

Türkiye is part of an extensive international framework for the cross-border recovery of maintenance. In particular, the 2007 Hague Child Support Convention, which has been in force for Türkiye since 1 February 2017, provides an important mechanism for cooperation, recognition and enforcement between Contracting States. Türkiye’s Ministry of Justice acts as the Central Authority for such international maintenance matters.

However, maintenance, compensation and matrimonial property claims must be legally classified separately. While child support and certain forms of spousal maintenance may benefit from specialised treaty mechanisms, material or moral compensation and other financial awards may require ordinary recognition and enforcement proceedings in the country where the debtor or assets are located.

For this reason, successful cross-border recovery requires more than obtaining a favourable divorce judgment. It requires a coordinated strategy concerning jurisdiction, applicable law, international treaties, recognition, enforcement, asset tracing and protective measures.

In international divorce litigation, the most valuable judgment is ultimately not merely the judgment that awards the claim—it is the judgment that can actually be enforced.