Abstract:

The compensation claim for the housewife’s livelihood due to physical incapacitation should be rejected if it is only assessed through the theory of differentiation. According to the theory of differentiation, in order to demand for material damages, there has to be a tangible loss of assets, which a housewife’s livelihood would be difficult to substantiate. However, according to a 1962 German federal court decision, a compensation claim for loss of housewife’s livelihood is acceptable. The German decision reasoned that since the labor, a housewife performs, has a calculable market value, it should be included in the loss of assets. In Swiss Law, a federal court accepted compensation for loss of housewife livelihood without taking into account the value of any substitution used for the housework or whether there has been any actual loss. In Turkish Law, the Court of Appeals has accepted the concept of housewife’s livelihood compensation while not considering whether there has been a loss in the assets in accordance with the theory of differentiation. The same is also applied to pensioners. In this case, the Court of Appeals pointed out that the livelihood itself, not the value of it, is accepted as an asset

Keywords: