| Reading Time: 20 Minutes

Compensation in Turkey For Earthquake-Related Damages

Compensation in Turkey For Earthquake-Related Damages

Turkey is in a highly seismic zone, making it prone to earthquakes. Unfortunately, earthquakes can cause significant damage to properties, leading to financial losses for the affected individuals. In Turkey, there are legal provisions for compensating damages resulting from earthquakes. However, the process can be complex, and individuals may face challenges in obtaining the appropriate compensation for their losses. This article will explore the compensation process in Turkey for earthquake-related damages.

You may be eligible for compensation if you live in Turkey and have suffered property damage due to an earthquake. Learn about the legal provisions for compensation and the process of obtaining it in Turkey. Our guide will help you navigate the complex process of claiming damages and receiving the appropriate compensation for your losses.


Losses of life and property due to earthquakes are a current and crucial issue in Turkey, and compensating for the damages caused to the victims is of great importance. Turkey is located on high-risk earthquake fault lines due to its geographical location. As a result, many earthquakes have occurred, such as the Marmara Earthquake, the Elazig earthquake, and currently, the earthquake centered in Kahramanmaras, leading to losses of life and property.

The question of who will be asked for how much and when regarding the damages incurred is important for those who have suffered damage. The responsibility of the administration, property owners, contractors, construction inspection organizations, and various other real and legal entities is in question, and earthquake victims should be able to claim compensation for both pecuniary and non-pecuniary.

What is The Responsibility of The Administration?

Individuals’ property or bodily integrity may be damaged because of the administration’s actions, and it is accepted that the administration will be responsible in these cases. The responsibility of the administration has been considered in terms of service fault and strict liability.

Poor performance, non-performance, or slow performance of the service is considered a service fault, and the priority is a strict liability because if there is a fault in the administration’s service, a claim must first be made based on this situation. The administration’s strict responsibility is to claim compensation without looking for fault based on the principles of risk and equity.[1]

Unlawful Act

The administration may engage in actions that are not in accordance with the law through administrative procedures and contracts.

Zoning Plan, Building Permit, and Establishment of Occupancy Permit

The administration is authorized to make a zoning plan and determine the settlements. Administration and municipalities are responsible for determining the settlements and areas where construction is possible by making a Regional Plan, Master Zoning Plan, and Implementation Zoning Plan.

The administration must make the said plans considering the earthquake risk and conduct the necessary inspections. Stream beds, risky areas on the fault line, and areas opened for development without the necessary research are included in the zoning plans. These administrative actions are against the law. Although the zoning plans’ purpose is to determine and develop settlements, the administration must prepare the zoning plans in earthquake zones that put human life at risk, considering the risks in question.

To construct and use buildings in accordance with the law, the Zoning Law has brought the obligation to obtain building permits and building occupancy permits. The building permit (AKA construction permit) is the permit that the contractor must obtain from the administration in order to construct a building in a certain area.

The municipalities and the governorates (Environment and Urbanism Directorates) can grant the building permit based on a project compliant with the architectural, static, plumbing, and technical regulations in accordance with the zoning plan. It is stated that the authorities must show utmost care in granting the building permit, take into account expert soil studies, and consider the area in which the building is located in terms of its seismic zone.

Considering the damage that occurred after the earthquake, it is seen that the construction also occurs in the areas where the fault line passes. Considering that the administration does not comply with the legal conditions while carrying out the construction permit establishment process, its responsibility will come to the fore. Moreover, even if the building permit has been given and the building has been built, granting the building occupancy permit is still an administrative act. Establishing both permits without sufficient and necessary research by the administration (municipality) is unlawful.

Illegal structures are structures that are built without obtaining the necessary permission from the administration or with a canceled license, and the decision of the Provincial Administrative Board or the Municipal Committee demolishes these structures that are against the license or without a license.

While the administration must act, not just actions, its inaction also requires its responsibility. There may be an unlawful action in the form of condoning the buildings that require demolition and allowing illegal construction or making an add-on contrary to the project. In any case, it is unlawful for the administration not to interfere with the said structures, to remain indifferent, and not to fulfill its duties imposed by the law. The responsibility of the administration will arise if the said structures collapse and damage occur during the earthquake. In addition, the crime of causing zoning pollution should be evaluated for the people who built the relevant structures.[2]

Administration’s Inspection Duty and Providing Permission to Building Inspection Organizations

A building inspection is carried out by the Building Inspection Department, established under the Ministry of Environment, Urbanization, and Climate Change. The administration may authorize the relevant institutions to conduct building inspections in accordance with the criteria it has determined.

Building inspection organizations are legal entities composed of architects and engineers who evaluate the technical aspects of the inspection of buildings and their compliance with the legislation. Compliance of the buildings with the legislation is audited within the framework of the conditions and requirements specified in accordance with Law No. 4708.

The buildings must be constructed in accordance with detailed regulations such as the Zoning Law and the Earthquake Regulation, and surveillance and inspection are the responsibility of the administration. Inspecting the buildings after the construction process and applying the necessary sanctions to prevent various damages is essential.

Failure of the administration to fulfill its inspection duty or permitting building inspection organizations without meeting the conditions specified in the law constitutes an unlawful act of the administration. Although the responsibility of the building inspection organizations will be examined separately, the administration will also be responsible for the said inspection procedures. If an earthquake occurs, the administration that does not fulfill its inspection obligation will be held responsible.

Buildings Built For Public Institutions and Disruption of Public Services

The construction of necessary service buildings and institutions such as lodgings, facilities, schools, and hospitals for the execution of public services and putting them at the service of society should be evaluated within the scope of the responsibility of the administration. It has been stated that the administration is responsible for compensating for the damage suffered by the public officer staying in the lodging house due to the earthquake.

Although the public procurement contracts of the administration will be examined later since they are considered private law contracts, evaluating the durability and earthquake suitability of the structures that the administration subsequently takes over to provide its services is an administrative procedure.

Before the state takes over the built structure, it should be examined that this building, which will provide public service after a detailed examination, is suitable for earthquakes. The current evaluations have stated that many public institutions and organizations were destroyed in the earthquake. The administration may be liable if the structures not covered by the public tender contract and acquired through subsequent allocation or expropriation are destroyed due to earthquakes.[3]

In case of disruption of public services and damage due to an earthquake, the responsibility of the administration should be evaluated. Public services provided by the administration may be disrupted due to an earthquake or other reasons. Disruption of public services such as health and security will be considered within the scope of service fault of the administration, provided that there is a causal link.

In this case, the administration, which acts faulty in providing health, safety, and other public services in the post-earthquake period, should be held responsible. The need for the administration to intervene to prevent looting and similar criminal acts, provide hygiene and cleaning services, and prevent epidemics can be evaluated within this scope.

Because it is one of the basic duties and responsibilities of the administration to ensure that the predecessors of a natural disaster and its successors are within the same framework as a requirement of public safety and interest, the responsibility of the administration will arise in the damages incurred due to acts contrary to these obligations.

Positive Obligation of The Administration

The administration is not only under the obligation of supervision and surveillance. Still, it is also responsible for making the necessary legal arrangements with the legislative and executive organs of the state. Accordingly, the Earthquake Code should be prepared in accordance with current scientific and technical developments. In addition, it is necessary to determine the conditions of the license and permit documents in detail and meticulously.

As technical progress is made, the said regulations should be revised to ensure compliance with the current situation, and the outdated regulations in force should be reconsidered. In addition, it is stated that the contractor should obtain a license for real and legal persons to be authorized to build separately from the construction permit because there are many uninformed and inexperienced contractors in our country, and their activities cause damage.[4]

Liability From Public Procurement Contracts

Public procurement contracts are considered contracts of the administration regarding private law. Through these contracts, the administration undertakes the construction of the buildings that it will use to perform public services by agreeing with a contractor in accordance with the procedure stipulated in the law.

The control of these structures compared to the structures taken over later differs. During the construction of the buildings, the inspection should be carried out by the relevant directorate. The supervision of technical issues is also the responsibility of the administration during the construction and delivery process of the building. It is important for the administration to choose the right contractor construction company and carry out the process, and violating these obligations is an unlawful act.[5]


The second condition of the liability of the administration is damage. The actual or realization of the damage should be viewed with certainty. In addition, it was sought that the damage was related to the administrative activity. The damage may be of economic nature as well as moral damage. Economic damages are tangible damages whose monetary value can be determined.

Damages such as damage, destruction of property, deprivation of income, medical treatment and drug costs, and temporary labor losses are evaluated within this scope. In case of an earthquake, the collapse of the building, damage to the goods inside the building, and income deprivation due to the inability to operate the building, which is a workplace, may be subject to damage.

Moral damage is the damage that affects the feelings, honor, and reputation of the person, and it is not possible to precisely determine its monetary nature. It will be possible for those who lost their relatives due to the earthquake to claim their moral damages due to the pain and grief they are exposed to. Compensation can be paid in cash or in the form of income.

Causal Link and Force Majeure

For the right to compensation to arise, it is sought that there is a causal link between the damage and the unlawful act. It has been stated that force majeure can cut the causal link. The occurrence of force majeure is described as an unpredictable and irresistible natural event. In judicial decisions and doctrine, it is stated that for an event to be considered force majeure, it must have the elements of “externality, unpredictability, irresistibility“.[6]

In order for an event to be qualified as force majeure, first of all, there must be no administrative behavior on the basis of the occurrence of the event. Secondly, an event must be irresistible and unavoidable to be considered force majeure. Whether an event is irresistible or not is decided by looking at the consequences and severity of that event. And finally, it must be unpredictable. Unpredictable events are extraordinary events. Frequent events cannot be described as unpredictable events. An earthquake should not be considered a force majeure in a region in the earthquake zone where there are continuous earthquakes.

In this lawsuit that was opened with the demand for compensation for the damages that are alleged to have been caused by the earthquake, the characteristics of the ground on which the structure is located, the control of earthquake resistance according to the ground condition, whether or not the structure has a occupancy permit, which authorities made and gave the zoning plans and construction permits, the inspection of structures from a zoning perspective, the determination and announcement of affected and potentially affected areas, as well as prohibited disaster areas for construction and residency, the rules, building techniques, design principles, and responsibilities of authorities to prepare the country’s earthquake maps, the performance and non-performance of inspection and control duties must be separately examined and the necessary measures taken by the authorities must be determined, and based on this outcome; it must be established whether or not the authorities followed a certain course of action or were inactive. From this perspective, as a result of the determination made above, if the inactivity of the authorities is in question, it must be considered as a “negative action” in accordance with the prevailing theory. In this case, since the damage that is claimed to have been suffered is the result of the authority’s “negative action”, the time limit for the lawsuit should be evaluated in accordance with Article 13 of Law No. 2577, but the decision rejecting it on the grounds of the time limit of the lawsuit is not accurate.” According to the decision dated 12.04.2004, E. 2004/1477, K. 2004/2115, it can also be understood that in activities carried out in a region located in an earthquake zone, the authorities must be prepared against earthquakes. If the authorities do not make the necessary studies, investigations, controls, and inspections, they cannot escape responsibility by relying on force majeure.[7]

However, it has been stated that an earthquake that occurs in areas where an earthquake can be predicted and where fault lines are certain cannot be accepted as force majeure.[8]

Making a Claim

Claims for compensation directed to the administration can be claimed as a full remedy action. The person whose right is violated must file a lawsuit as a plaintiff. In the full remedy action to be filed in the administrative jurisdiction for the tender lawsuit, which is an administrative contract, the remedy of application to the relevant administration must be exhausted.

In calculating the compensation and the statute of limitations, a distinction is made between damages to property and damages suffered by individuals. In case of damage to the goods, the statute of limitations is calculated based on the date on which the damage occurred. In ongoing cases, it starts when the event causing the damage ends and the scope becomes clear.

In case of damages suffered by individuals, the date of the decision shall be taken as the basis, with the exception of deliberate delay. In full jurisdiction cases, there is a 60 (sixty) day litigation period. While filing the lawsuit, relying on either fault of service or strict liability is necessary.

Responsibility of The Contractor

The contractor may be held liable by the employer for failing to fulfill their obligations arising from the work contract properly, or a claim for compensation may be claimed based on tort.

Responsibility of The Contractor Arising From The Contract For Works

Since the contract of work is made between the contractor and the employer, the damage in question can be claimed by the employer based on the breach of the contract. The contractor has various debts arising from the contract of work. Of these, two obligations that are particularly important in the earthquake issue are the contractor’s obligation to choose and use good materials and the obligation to guarantee against defects.

The contractor is obliged to use good quality materials and materials suitable for the work to be revealed in a way that will meet the qualifications sought in the contract. The contractor is responsible for the damage caused by the defect of material and the malfunction of the material.

Due to the benefit of society and the state in particular, the contractor is under the burden of choosing more carefully because the relevant construction materials are subject to certain limits in accordance with the legislation. The material used in construction works should be selected by considering issues such as collapse, fire, adequacy of the carrier system, hygiene, and health. The contractor is responsible to the employer for the damage caused by not using good quality materials. Accordingly, the contractor is obliged to pay economic damages to the employer in case of collapse or destruction caused by the earthquake due to the unsuitability of the material.[9]

Another of the contractor’s debts to the employer is the guarantee against the defect. The liability of guarantee against the defect is the contractor’s undertaking the responsibility arising from the defect in case of defective delivery of the work, and there are alternative rights that the employer can use. Situations that eliminate the usability of the work and make it impossible to benefit from it are stated as defective.

The defect can be open or hidden, and the obligation to review and report differs according to the type of defect. The hidden defect must be reported to the contractor as soon as it is discovered. It is within the scope of a defect that the work is done in violation of the building permit, approved project, zoning status, and legislation.

The emergence of defects in the buildings destroyed due to the earthquake occurs simultaneously with the damage. If it is noticed that the work is defective; for example, and it was not built in accordance with the project when it collapsed due to the earthquake, these defects should be considered hidden faults.

Since it is possible to notify the contractor of hidden defects only when they are discovered, it should be said that the employer can use his rights specified in the law. Moreover, even if a defect can be noticed upon review, the employer can exercise their rights, and notification of these matters is not required. The employer legally has the right to withdraw from the contract, request a price reduction, request the defect’s elimination, and demand compensation.

Although it is impossible to renege on the contract, request a reduction in the price, and ask for the defect to be corrected for the structures destroyed in the event of an earthquake, the employer will be able to demand compensation for the damage. The aforementioned right of claim must be exercised within the limitation period of five years for immovable structures and twenty years in case of serious fault of the contractor.

The Liability Arising From The Tort of The Contractor.

They who cause harm to another by the faulty and unlawful act are obliged to compensate for this damage. There are also strict liability tort cases. For a wrongful act to be in question, there must be an unlawful act. Accordingly, the contractor who constructs the buildings destroyed in the event of an earthquake commits an act that violates individuals’ absolute and relative rights due to the illegal construction.

They will be able to demand compensation for the damages of those harmed due to the contractor’s actions that are contrary to the construction permit, the project, and the requirements specified in the inspection conditions. Various damages may occur due to the acts in question; compensation for current, probable, and future damage is possible. The contractor’s intention or negligence is sought; if the contractor acted wilfully, it is considered intent; if they did not use sufficient will to prevent the result from occurring, it is considered negligence.

The type of fault is not important for liability to arise. The contractor who caused damage with a violation of the law shall compensate for the items of damage, such as medical expenses, loss of earnings, losses arising from the reduction or loss of working ability, losses arising from the disruption of economic future, funeral expenses, compensation for deprivation of support, and the cost of the telephone or damaged property.

In the case in question, the civil courts are authorized, and the two-year statute of limitations starts from the date the perpetrator and the damage are learned. However, in any case, the statute of limitations expires within ten years from the date of the act. If a statute of limitations is stipulated in the criminal laws, this shall be taken as the basis. For example, since the statute of limitations for wilful homicide has been determined as twenty-five years and for reckless homicide as fifteen years, these statute of limitations will apply to the damages in question.[10]

The Liability of The Building Owner

The owner of the building can be the person who possesses the property rights and may have transferred the ownership to another person through a sales contract or can become the lessor through a lease contract and be held responsible. The building owner’s responsibility must be evaluated in fault-based and faultless wrongful acts.

Responsibility of The Building Order Arising From The Sales Contract

The building owner may transfer the ownership to a third party after receiving the work from the contractor. Although the contract of sale is made with the aim of transferring ownership, it imposes a guaranteed obligation on the seller against the defect. The defect is evaluated if the required qualities are not found in the goods in question.

The defect, which is a defect that reduces or eliminates the availability, is in question if the buildings are demolished due to an earthquake because the fact that the immovable property subject to sale does not have the necessary qualities in the building is defect. The qualities that must be present in the building are included in other legislation, especially earthquake regulation.

The obligation to review and notify must be complied with in the obligation of guarantee against the defect. Still, if there is a hidden defect, this defect should be reported when it is discovered. The defects found in the buildings can be described as hidden defects, such as the poor quality of the material and insufficient columns.

In addition, the gross negligent seller cannot avoid liability by claiming that the notification obligation has not been complied with. Finally, it is not possible for people who have made sales as a profession to claim that the notification period has not been complied with. In the event of a defect, although the law has granted the buyer various rights, the person who is the buyer of the destroyed building in the event of an earthquake will be able to use their right to demand compensation for the damage.

Liability of The Building Order Arising From The Lease Agreement

The owner may have left the building to the lessor’s use by concluding a lease agreement. The owner of the building, who is in the position of the lessor in accordance with the lease agreement, is obliged to keep the leased property suitable for use and deliver it in a suitable condition.

This debt, a guarantee against the defect, covers keeping the rented immovable for the purpose of use. Accordingly, the lessor must deliver the immovable property, which has the qualifications required in the structure, to the lessee conveniently. The damage of the lessor of the unsuitable immovable, which was destroyed during the earthquake and caused damage to the lessee, creates the debt of compensation. The lessee can claim material and moral compensation claims.[11]

Tort Liability of Building Owner

The building owner must compensate for the damages caused by their faulty unlawful act. For example, the owner of the vehicle damaged due to the collapse of the building may apply for the responsibility of the owner of the building. In addition, a special, strict liability situation is foreseen for the owner of the building. In this case, where the fault of the owner of the building is not sought, there is the actual sovereignty of the owner of the building and the duty of care.

Damages arising from deficiencies in the construction of the building or other structures and lack of maintenance are within this scope. The construction defect of the building is determined by considering the issues, such as the purpose for which the building is allocated and the type of building. In this case, the owner is obliged to compensate the material and moral damage of the third person. The causal link between the damage and the disorder can be cut by force majeure.

However, if the earthquake does not destroy the durable buildings and damages some of them, it indicates a disorder and is not considered to cut the causal link. The person who suffered damage due to the building collapsed on the passer-by during the earthquake may claim compensation in this context. Owners of the right of residence and usufruct are also responsible in this context, just like the owner of the building.[12]

Responsibility of Building Inspection Institutions

Building inspection institutions are held responsible for fulfilling the inspection duty assigned to them by the administration. Building inspection institutions are responsible for conducting risk-based inspections pursuant to Law No. 4708, and they are responsible to the owner and the administration for damages arising from construction damage.

During the inspection process, inspection organizations must detect if the building has been built incomplete or faulty, contrary to the license and its annexes, science, art, and health rules. Otherwise, they are liable for a period of 15 years due to the load-bearing system of the building and two (2) years for the damage in other parts that are not carriers in proportion to their faults. The loss of life and property of the third person and the owner of the building, which is not caused by damage to the structure and does not constitute a loss of value, can be compensated within the framework of general provisions.[13]

Liability For Damages From Highways/Roads

Highway/road construction and operation are the responsibility of the administration, and the administration will be responsible for the damages that occur due to service faults. The administration’s responsibility is not only the construction but also the operation of the highway/road. The compensation for the material and moral damages caused by the operational disruptions on the highway/road due to the earthquake will be demanded from the administration.[14]

Compulsory Earthquake Insurance and Compulsory Traffic Insurance

The risk insured in the compulsory earthquake insurance is an earthquake in the nature of a natural disaster. The beneficiaries are the owners and usufructuary. Independent sections within the scope of the condominium law, buildings constructed as residences on immovables registered in the land registry and subject to private ownership, independent sections used as trade, office, and similar purposes within these buildings, and residences made by the state or given credit due to natural disasters are included in the coverage.

Direct material damages caused by the earthquake, including fire, explosion, and landslide, to the insured buildings and their foundations will be compensated based on the new construction cost determined by the market value of the building at the place and date of the occurrence of the risk.[15]

Compulsory traffic insurance is related to the compensation of death, injury, and all kinds of damages of third parties in case of motor vehicle operation. Although claims for material damage, health expenses, permanent disability, and deprivation of support can be claimed in compulsory traffic insurance, the compulsory traffic insurance that covers the risk of damage to someone else due to the operation of the vehicle cannot be the subject of claims for damages arising from the earthquake.

On the other hand, since the automobile insurance contract (vehicle insurance) covers the damages caused by earthquakes, landslides, storms, hail, lightning, or volcanic eruption, the risk will be realized in case of an earthquake the damage will be claimed. The motor insurance contract (vehicle insurance) is not compulsory insurance, the loss adjuster determines the damage to the vehicle, and the insurance compensation is paid to the creditor by the relevant insurance company.[16]

State of Emergency and Its Scope

To manage the process due to the earthquake, a state of emergency for three months covering ten provinces was declared in the Parliamentary Assembly dated 09.02.2023. If the state of emergency is declared as a natural disaster, it has been stated that the money needed for the rescue of the victims of the disaster, the compensation of the damages, and all kinds of movable and immovable properties and the works that need to be done will be provided with money, goods, and work obligation.

In this context, although it is foreseen to use public resources first, land, building, facility, vehicle, equipment, food, medicine and medical equipment, clothing, and other items may be requested from real and legal persons in the region. It is also possible to impose a work obligation on people aged 18-60.

The state has the authority to limit entrances and exits to settlements, to evacuate these places, to suspend education, to close accommodation facilities, when necessary, to use them in accordance with the requirements of the state of emergency, to demolish dangerous buildings, to seize them in order to benefit from communication tools and equipment.

If a state of emergency is declared, fundamental rights and freedoms will be restricted. Fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals, such as property and travel, are restricted. In addition, it is possible to change the limitations stipulated in the laws. For example, the detention period for theft and looting crimes observed after the Kahramanmaraş-centered earthquake was increased to four days.[17]


  • Atay, Ender Ethem, (2012), Idare Hukuku (Administrative Law), Turhan Kitabevi (Turhan Bookstore).
  • Atay, Ender Ethem, Odabasi, Hasan, Gokcan, Tahsin, (2003), Idarenin Sorumlulugu ve Tazminat Davalari (Liability of the Administration and Compensation Cases), Seckin Yayincilik (Seckin Publishing).
  • Ates, T. (2013), Deprem Hukuku (Earthquake Law), Bilge Yayinevi (Bilge Publishing House).
  • Biten, B. Y., (2022). Kasko Sozlesmesi (Insurance Agreement)(Yayin/Publication No: 722785) [Yuksek Lisans, Akdeniz Universitesi (Akdeniz University Master’s Degree)]. Yuksekogretim Kurulu (Higher Education Board). <https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezDetay.jsp?id=bE3l0bKDtxaHqOafFgpWTg&no=Vg4o0nNAxmpp1q66t6dGcQ>
  • Bucaktepe, A. (2015). Depremden Dolayi Idarenin Sorumlulugu (Responsibility of the Administration Due to the Earthquake). Dicle Universitesi Hukuk Fakultesi Dergisi (Journal of Dicle University Faculty of Law), 17-18 (26-27-28-29), 93-122. Retrieved from: <https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/duhfd/issue/23027/246202>
  • Duman, Ilker Hasan, (2017) Insaat Hukuku (Construction Law), Seckin Yayincilik (Seckin Publishing).
  • ISIK, K., (2019). Turkiye’de Olaganustu Hal Donemlerinde Temel Hak ve Ozgurluklerin Sinirlandirilmasi (Restriction of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms During the State of Emergency in Turkey)(Yayin/Publications No: 603888), [Yuksek Lisans, Cankaya Universitesi (Cankaya University Master’s Degree)]. Yuksekogretim Kurulu (Higher Education Board).
  • Karayalcin, Y. (2003). Muteahhidin ve Yapi Denetim Kurulusunun Deprem Zararindan Sorumlulugu – Garanti Suresi – Zamanasimi Def’i – Durustluk Ilkesine Aykirilik (Liability of the Contractor and the Building Inspection Board for Earthquake Damage – Warranty Period – Timeout Define – Violation of the Principle of Integrity). Ticaret Hukuku ve Yargitay Kararlari Sempozyumu (Commercial Law and Supreme Court Decisions Symposium), 0, s. 27-30.
  • Kaya, Z., (2021). Trafik Sigortasi Kapsaminda Sigortacinin Tazminat Odeme Yukumlulugu (Liability of the Insurer to Pay Compensation within the Scope of Traffic Insurance)(Yayin/Publication No: 675488), [Yuksek Lisans, Ankara Sosyal Bilimler Universitesi (Master’s Degree, Ankara Social Sciences University)]. Yuksekogretim Kurulu (Higher Education Board). <https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezDetay.jsp?id=3VM36BZlJYIj8YNEMLfgbg&no=aa51IP4gZkXCg00AsecUOQ>
  • OGUZMAN, Kemal/ OZ, Turgut, Borclar Hukuku Genel Hukumler (Law of Obligations General Provisions), Cilt (Volume): 2, 15. Basi (Edition), Istanbul, Vedat Kitapcilik (Vedat Bookstore), 2020.
  • Yavuz, E. (2018). Prof. Dr. Huseyin Hatemi’ye 80. Yil Armagani (80. Yil Sempozyumu Tebligleri / 80th Anniversary Symposium Papers). Y. Gulluoglu Altun (Yay. Haz.), Yapi Malikinin Sorumluluguna Iliskin Turk Borclar Kanunu ve 4708 S. Yapı Denetimi Hakkinda Kanunundaki Hukumlerin Karsilastirilmasi (Comparison of the Turkish Code of Obligations Regarding the Liability of the Building Owner and the Law No. 4708 on Building Inspection), (s. 305-310). On Iki Levha Yayincilik (On Iki Levha Publihing).
  • Yayla, A., (2015). Idarenin Kusursuz Sorumlulugu (Strict Responsibility of the Administration). On Iki Levha Yayincilik (On Iki Levha Publihing).
  • Yongalik, A. (2001). Zorunlu Deprem Sigortasi. Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Dergisi (Compulsory Earthquake Insurance. Journal of Banking and Commercial Law), 21, s. 164-165.
  • ZEVKLILER, Aydin GOKYAYLA, Emre, Borclar Hukuku Ozel Borc Iliskileri (Law of Obligations Private Debt Relationships), 20. Basi (Edition), Istanbul, Vedat Kitapcilik (Vedat Bookstore), 2020.


  • [1] Yayla, A. (2015). Idarenin Kusursuz Sorumlulugu (Liability of the Administration and Compensation Cases). On Iki Levha Yayincilik (On Iki Levha Publihing).
  • [2] Ates, T. (2013), Deprem Hukuku, Bilge Yayinevi (Earthquake Law, Bilge Publishing House).
  • [3] Atay, Ender Ethem, Odabasi, Hasan, Gokcan, Tahsin (2003), Idarenin Sorumlulugu ve Tazminat Davalari, Seckin Yayincilik (Liability of the Administration and Compensation Cases, Seckin Publishing)
  • [4] Atay, Ender Ethem, (2012), Idare Hukuku, Turhan Kitabevi (Administrative Law, Turhan Bookstore).
  • [5] ibid
  • [6] Ozay, Il Han, Gunisiginda Yonetim, Filiz Kitabevi (Management by Daylight, Filiz Bookstore), Istanbul, 2004, s. 878; Gozler/Kaplan, s. 788. Gozubuyuk mucbir sebebin unsurlarinin “kusursuzluk, sezilemezlik, karsi konulamazlik, gerceklik” oldugunu ifade etmektedir. Gozubuyuk, s. 66; “Gerek yargisal kararlar, gerekse ogretide kabul edilen bu tanimlamaya gore zorlayici sebep kavramini olusturan temel unsur, “dissalligin” yani sira “onlenemez” ve “ongorulemez” olmasidir”. D.I.D.D.K., Karar Tarihi (Decision Date): 17.12.2009, E. 2008/11, K. 2009/3108.
  • [8] Bucaktepe, A. (2015). Depremden Dolayi Idarenin Sorumlulugu. Dicle Universitesi Hukuk Fakultesi Dergisi (Responsibility of the Administration Due to the Earthquake. Dicle University Journal of the Faculty of Law), 17-18 (26-27-28-29) , 93-122 . Retrieved from: <https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/duhfd/issue/23027/246202>
  • [9] Duman, Ilker Hasan, (2017), Insaat Hukuku, Seckin Yayincilik (Construction Law, Seckin Publishing)
  • [10] OGUZMAN, Kemal/ OZ, Turgut, Borclar Hukuku Genel Hukumler (Law of Obligations General Provisions), Cilt (Volume): 2, 15. Basi (Edition), Istanbul, Vedat Kitapcilik (Vedat Bookstore), 2020.
  • [11] ZEVKLILER, Aydin GOKYAYLA, Emre, Borclar Hukuku Ozel Borc Iliskileri (Law of Obligations Private Debt Relationships), 20. Basi (Edition), Istanbul, Vedat Kitapcilik (Vedat Bookstore), 2020.
  • [12] ibid
  • [13] Karayalcin, Y. (2003). Muteahhidin ve Yapi Denetim Kurulusunun Deprem Zararindan Sorumlulugu – Garanti Suresi – Zamanasimi Def’i – Durustluk Ilkesine Aykirilik (Liability of the Contractor and the Building Inspection Board for Earthquake Damage – Warranty Period – Timeout Define – Violation of the Principle of Integrity). Ticaret Hukuku ve Yargitay Kararlari Sempozyumu (Commercial Law and Supreme Court Decisions Symposium), 0, s. 27-30.
  • [14] ibid
  • [15] Yongalik, A. (2001). Zorunlu Deprem Sigortasi. Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Dergisi (Compulsory Earthquake Insurance. Journal of Banking and Commercial Law), 21, s. 164-165
  • [16] Biten, B. Y. (2022). Kasko Sozlesmesi (Insurance Agreement)(Yayin/Publication No: 722785) [Yuksek Lisans, Akdeniz Universitesi (Akdeniz University Master’s Degree)]. Yuksekogretim Kurulu (Higher Education Board). <https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezDetay.jsp?id=bE3l0bKDtxaHqOafFgpWTg&no=Vg4o0nNAxmpp1q66t6dGcQ>
  • [17] ISIK, K., (2019). Turkiye’de Olaganustu Hal Donemlerinde Temel Hak ve Ozgurluklerin Sinirlandirilmasi (Restriction of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms During the State of Emergency in Turkey)(Yayin/Publications No: 603888), [Yuksek Lisans, Cankaya Universitesi (Cankaya University Master’s Degree)]. Yuksekogretim Kurulu (Higher Education Board).

Keywords: Compensation in Turkey For Earthquake-Related Damages, Compensating Damages Resulting From earthquakes in Turkey, Compensation Process in Turkey For Earthquake-Related Damages.

Related Articles