Who Owns The Jewelry Gifted at a Wedding??

• Who Owns the Jewelry Gifted at a Wedding?
• How is the Return of Wedding Gold Ensured?
• What Should Be Done if Ornamental Gold/Jewelry is Given Voluntarily?

In our society, there is a widespread belief that gold gifted by the groom's side belongs to the groom's side, and gold gifted by the bride's side belongs to the bride's side. Wedding jewelry often becomes a major point of contention between spouses or their families even during the wedding phase, and disputes over wedding jewelry can lead spouses to divorce. There is no explicit legal provision regarding the ownership of ornamental gold/jewelry and cash gifted to the bride and groom by their close circle during the establishment of the marital union.

According to the current precedents of the Court of Cassation, as a rule, ornamental gold/jewelry gifted during a wedding is deemed to have been gifted to the woman, regardless of who gifted it and to whom it was gifted. Wedding jewelry refers to all ornaments such as bracelets, necklace sets, and quarter gold coins. However, jewelry specific to men and usable only by men will belong to the man. Examples of men's specific jewelry include wristwatches and cufflinks.

Consequently, all ornamental gold/jewelry belongs to the woman, irrespective of who gifted it, its quantity, or whether it was gifted to the bride or the groom.

Indeed, in its ruling numbered 2019/2763 E., 2019/9997 K., the 3rd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation stated the following: "As a rule, ornamental gold/jewelry gifted during a wedding is deemed to have been gifted to the woman, regardless of who gifted it, unless there is an agreement to the contrary, and thus acquires the nature of her personal property. If the defendant proves that these items were given to the husband not to be returned, and were converted into cash and spent for common needs with the woman's request and consent, the husband is relieved from returning these items."

📎 Related: Visit our Izmir Divorce Lawyer page for detailed information.

If the wedding jewelry is in the possession of the husband, the woman may file a lawsuit demanding the return of her personal property, the wedding jewelry. This lawsuit, filed to claim the ornamental gold/jewelry gifted at the wedding, is called a lawsuit for the return of ornamental gold/jewelry. Lawsuits for the return of wedding jewelry are subject to proportional court fees. Therefore, a certain fee must be paid based on the value of the claimed ornamental gold/jewelry.

In lawsuits for the return of wedding jewelry, the claim should primarily be for the "return in kind" of the ornamental gold/jewelry; if this is not possible, then the return of its monetary value should be claimed in the alternative (hierarchically). Today, it is often not economically feasible to keep the ornamental gold/jewelry gifted at a wedding, so spouses may have converted it into cash or spent it. In such cases where return in kind is not possible, the monetary value of the ornamental gold/jewelry is claimed.

If a woman seeking divorce already has a pending divorce lawsuit against her spouse, she can request the return of the wedding jewelry during that lawsuit. However, if the divorce lawsuit between the spouses has concluded, a divorce decree has been issued, and the return of the wedding jewelry was not claimed, a separate lawsuit can be filed to demand the return of the ornamental gold/jewelry. Ornamental gold/jewelry cannot be claimed when a lawsuit for the division of marital property is filed during a divorce.

How Long Does an Ornamental Gold/Jewelry Lawsuit Take to File?

It is useful to evaluate the duration for filing a lawsuit for the return of wedding jewelry, i.e., ornamental gold/jewelry, under different possibilities.

The first possibility is when the wedding jewelry is under the husband's direct custody, unchanged. If the ornamental gold/jewelry remains unchanged under the husband's custody, a lawsuit for its return in kind can be filed without any time limit. Indeed, claims for the return of ornamental gold/jewelry in kind are based on the right of ownership. Therefore, there is no statute of limitations for claims regarding the return of wedding jewelry in kind.

The second possibility is when the return of wedding jewelry in kind is not possible. In other words, if the woman claims the monetary value of the wedding jewelry during the lawsuit, she must file this lawsuit within 10 years. This is because claims for the monetary return of wedding jewelry are in the nature of compensation. Therefore, for claims regarding the monetary return of ornamental gold/jewelry, there is a 10-year statute of limitations period starting from the finalization of the divorce decree.

How Are Lawsuits for the Return of Wedding Jewelry Proven?

Pursuant to Article 6 of the Turkish Civil Code, the burden of proof in lawsuits for the return of wedding jewelry lies with the plaintiff. The plaintiff filing a lawsuit for the return of ornamental gold/jewelry is obliged to prove that the wedding jewelry was taken by the defendant husband and is not in her possession. If she fails to prove that the gold gifted at the wedding is not in her possession and was taken from her, her lawsuit will be dismissed.

The plaintiff must first prove the existence of the ornamental gold/jewelry, stating its type, quality, fineness, weight, quantity, and value separately in her petitions. This can be proven with wedding videos, wedding photographs, dowry deeds, witness testimonies, oaths, expert witness examinations, and similar evidence. In these lawsuits, after wedding videos and photographs are submitted to the file, a report is obtained from a jeweler expert witness. This report, prepared by the jeweler expert witness, determines the values of the wedding jewelry. The expert witness will make calculations based on the documents submitted to the file. In the expert witness report, the value of the gold will be based on the lawsuit filing date.

How Can a Woman Who Leaves the Marital Home Obtain Wedding Jewelry?

Ornamental gold/jewelry are items that can be easily stored, transported, and taken away. For this reason, the Court of Cassation has evaluated that it is consistent with common life experiences for these items to be on the woman or stored at home. In this evaluation, it was also stated that it is contrary to the ordinary course of life for ornamental gold/jewelry to have been handed over to the man. Following these evaluations, the Court of Cassation has ruled that it is always possible for a woman planning to leave the home to take or hide her wedding jewelry beforehand.

In this context, as a rule, it is accepted that a woman who leaves the home voluntarily also takes her ornamental gold/jewelry with her. Therefore, a woman who leaves the home must prove that the ornamental gold/jewelry remained at home. However, it is not possible to accept that a woman who was expelled from the home or forced to seek refuge with her family due to violence, whose gold was converted into cash during the marriage, whose gold was taken by her in-laws, or who was given gold as a rental, took her ornamental gold/jewelry with her.

Indeed, in its ruling numbered 2018/938 E., 2018/3830 K., the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation stated the following:

"The plaintiff woman claimed that the ornamental gold/jewelry was converted into cash and spent by the defendant, while the defendant man argued that it was taken by her. According to life experiences, it is normal for such items to be on the woman or to have been stored and kept at home. In other words, it is contrary to the ordinary course of life for these items to have been left under the defendant's possession and custody. Furthermore, the items in question are of a kind that can be easily stored, transported, and taken away. Therefore, it is always possible for a woman planning to leave the home to take or hide them beforehand. The plaintiff is under the burden of proving that the ornamental gold/jewelry subject to the lawsuit was converted into cash and spent by the defendant."

Is the Return of Wedding Jewelry Spent on Wedding Expenses or Household Expenses Required?

It is possible that wedding jewelry may be used for wedding expenses, common household expenses, purchasing a house or car, or for the husband's debts. In such situations, whether the woman can reclaim her wedding jewelry is an important issue. The determining factor here is whether the wedding jewelry was given to be returned. According to the precedents of the Court of Cassation, it is presumed that the woman gave her ornamental gold/jewelry on the condition of receiving it back. Therefore, in such cases, the husband is obliged to prove that the ornamental gold/jewelry given to him by the woman was not given on the condition of repayment. Otherwise, the husband will be obliged to return the wedding jewelry.

Indeed, in its ruling numbered 2017/1769 E., 2018/13037 K., the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation stated the following:

"Ornamental gold/jewelry gifted to a woman during marriage is deemed to have been gifted to her, regardless of who purchased it, and thus acquires the nature of her personal property. In this case, if it is proven that the ornamental gold/jewelry was given to the defendant-counter-plaintiff husband not to be returned, the husband is relieved from returning the ornamental gold/jewelry he received. In the concrete case, although it is understood that the ornamental gold/jewelry was converted into cash, it has not been proven that it was given to the defendant-counter-plaintiff husband voluntarily and without a condition of return. The defendant husband is obliged to prove that the converted ornamental gold/jewelry was given voluntarily and without a condition of return, and since the defendant husband could not prove this, he is obliged to return the ornamental gold/jewelry subject to the lawsuit to the plaintiff woman."

Can Ornamental Gold/Jewelry Be Claimed by Way of Amendment (Islah)?

As is known, an amendment (ıslah) allows for an increase in the amount claimed in a lawsuit. The expansion and modification of the matters claimed in a lawsuit are also done by way of amendment. Therefore, in a lawsuit for the return of ornamental gold/jewelry, the quantity of ornamental gold/jewelry can be increased by way of amendment. However, wedding jewelry not claimed in the petition of the lawsuit cannot be claimed by submitting an amendment petition. The important point here is that the amendment only pertains to the amount claimed in the lawsuit.

Indeed, in its ruling numbered 2013/8174 E., 2013/21102 K., the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation stated the following:

"The plaintiff woman claimed the value of ornamental gold/jewelry in her petition but did not make a claim regarding the cash gifted at the wedding. While the proceedings were ongoing, on 20.9.2012, when she amended her claim for ornamental gold/jewelry, she also claimed the cash gifted at the wedding, which she had not made subject to the lawsuit, thereby introducing a new claim through amendment. A claim can be modified through amendment, but a new claim cannot be added. Furthermore, no court fee was collected for this. Instead of ruling that there is no ground for a decision on the plaintiff's claim regarding the cash gifted at the wedding, it is necessary to..."

Av. Mehmet Yücesoy

İzmir Attorney & Legal Consultancy