After a divorce, meeting the joint child’s needs such as care, housing and education is both a moral and a legal responsibility for parents. In good faith, you may have taken on your child’s private school instalments, educational materials or health expenses. However, if you did not pay attention to the description on the bank receipt when making these payments by bank transfer, you may face the risk of your former spouse initiating enforcement proceedings against you for accumulated child support arrears.
So, do school payments count as child support, and can payments made for the child’s school fees be offset against the child support debt? What does the absence of a description on a bank receipt mean legally? The precedent decision of the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay), numbered 2022/5396 E. and 2022/6165 K., gives a very clear and critical answer to this question.
Child support is only one of the financial consequences of divorce; when considered together with issues such as division of property in divorce and participation in acquired property, a whole set of obligations extending over many years emerges for the parties. Proving that these obligations have been fulfilled is largely a procedural matter: having actually made the payment is often not enough on its own; it must be documented which debt the payment was made for.
Below you will first find the Court of Cassation’s reasoning on the subject, followed by the mistakes most frequently made in practice by persons liable to pay child support and the practical steps to follow in order to avoid them.
In the Light of the Court of Cassation Decision: Why Does a School Payment Not Replace Child Support?
In the specific case that was the subject of the decision, the father, who was liable to pay child support, regularly transferred money to his former wife’s bank account to pay his child’s private school instalments, and the mother transferred these amounts directly to the school’s account. The mother later initiated enforcement proceedings against the father, claiming accumulated child support arrears.
The father filed an action for a negative declaration (menfi tespit davası) seeking the annulment of the enforcement proceedings, arguing that the school instalments he had paid should be offset against his child support debt.
Following its review, the Court of Cassation emphasised the following legal principles in line with the provisions of the Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK) and the Turkish Civil Code (TMK):
Treated as the Performance of a Moral Duty
Under TBK Art. 78/2, enrichment resulting from the performance of a moral duty cannot be reclaimed. A father’s attending to his child’s education or health and covering the related expenses legally constitutes the performance of a moral duty (a donation/gift).
The Holistic Nature of Child Support
Under TMK Art. 182/2, child support (iştirak nafakası) is intended to ensure that the parent who has not been granted custody contributes not only to the child’s education expenses but to all of the child’s essential needs, such as housing, food, health and clothing. For this reason, payment of school fees does not directly replace the child support awarded by the court.
The Binding Nature of the Receipt Description
According to the Court of Cassation, if the bank receipt does not expressly state “child support payment” or “child support for the relevant month”, the transfers made cannot automatically be deducted from the child support debt.
Critical Detail in the Decision: In the specific case, although it was proven that all of the father’s payments without a description went to the child’s school, these amounts were not offset against the child support debt. Only the portion of TRY 4,445 whose receipt expressly stated “nafaka” (support) was deducted from the debt; the remaining school payments amounting to tens of thousands of lira were legally deemed to be gifts.
This picture reveals a misconception frequently encountered in practice: proving that the money was actually spent on the child was not sufficient on its own for that payment to be counted towards the child support debt. The decisive point in the decision was not where the money went, but whether the receipt clearly showed which debt the payment was made for.
Common Mistakes Made by Persons Liable to Pay Child Support
Even when acting in good faith after a divorce, failing to comply with procedural rules can lead to serious hardship. The most common mistakes are:
- Making transfers without a description: Leaving the description field blank or writing only a name when making a bank transfer.
- Paying the institution directly: Depositing the money directly with the private school or course instead of the former spouse’s account while there is an official child support obligation.
- Paying by hand: Making cash payments without obtaining a signed written receipt.
- Using different descriptions: Writing “school instalment”, “child’s pocket money” or “education support” on the receipt. Such wording does not replace child support and is instead assessed as falling within the scope of a moral duty.
What Should Be Considered to Avoid Losing Your Rights?
If you do not want to pay twice because of your child support debt and want to avoid facing enforcement proceedings in the future, you should pay particular attention to the following:
- Use the bank channel: Make all your child support payments through traceable bank accounts.
- Add clear and explicit wording: Always write a detailed note such as “Child Support Payment for [Year] / [Month]” in the description field of the bank receipt.
- Separate extra expenses: Clothes you buy for your child, holiday expenses or school fees do not remove the official child support set by the court. Make such extra contributions after you have paid your child support debt.
The type, amount and method of payment of child support are often agreed in the uncontested divorce protocol. Stating clearly in the protocol through which channel, on which date and with which description the payment will be made prevents a large part of potential offsetting disputes from the outset.
Frequently Asked Questions
I paid the school instalment, but enforcement proceedings were initiated against me. What should I do?
If you did not make the payments with a “child support” description, it may be necessary to file an action for a negative declaration against the enforcement proceedings or to object before the enforcement court. However, under Court of Cassation case law, offsetting payments without a description is quite difficult; legal advice should be obtained according to the particular circumstances of the case.
If I only write “Child’s Expenses” on the receipt, will it count as child support?
No. According to Court of Cassation decisions, unless the receipt specifically contains the words “Nafaka” (Support) or “İştirak Nafakası” (Child Support), such payments are deemed to be the performance of a moral duty and are not deducted from the child support debt.
Are child support payments made by hand valid?
The burden of proving payments made by hand lies with the person liable to pay child support. If there is no signed and dated written statement (receipt) from the other party stating “I received the child support by hand”, payments made by hand may be considered legally invalid.
Conclusion
Small procedural mistakes in divorce and family law matters can lead to heavy financial losses and double payments. To ensure that the expenses you incur for your child satisfy your legal obligations and that you do not suffer any legal detriment, it is advisable to seek professional legal advice from a lawyer. In short: the answer to the question of whether school payments count as child support depends more on the description on the receipt than on the amount of the payment.
Order and documentation in child support payments are your strongest support in any dispute that may arise in the future. Archiving payment receipts by year, keeping the same standard in the description text and keeping extra expenses separate from official child support provide significant advantages, in terms of both time and cost, against a claim raised years later.
Legal Notice: This text has been prepared for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. sophoshukuk.com makes no referral, guarantee or promise of outcome. Each case must be assessed on its own particular circumstances; for your specific dispute, please obtain professional advice from a lawyer.