AZE.US
Spouses in Azerbaijan may seek compensation for moral harm suffered during a marriage, but obtaining such an award remains difficult in practice because the Family Code does not provide a separate mechanism for harm caused by conduct that leads to divorce.
Vesti Baku reports, citing Pravda.az, that Afag Aliyeva, a lawyer with Expert-SM LTD, said psychological pressure, repeated insults, humiliation, violence and unlawful interference in a person’s private life may provide grounds for a civil claim seeking compensation for moral harm.
Divorce or adultery alone does not automatically create a right to compensation, Aliyeva said.
Azerbaijan’s legislation protects honor, dignity and personal rights. Relevant provisions include Articles 23 and 1097.1 of the Civil Code. In divorce proceedings, however, courts generally focus on division of property, alimony and child custody or residence. Harm suffered by one spouse may therefore remain outside the main family-law case.
Aliyeva said the legal position may be affected by the Supreme Court Plenum’s Dec. 24, 2025, Decision No. 20 on the protection of personal rights. Under the approach described by the lawyer, once unlawful direct interference with a person’s private rights is established, moral harm is presumed to exist unless the contrary is proven.
Depending on the facts, a claim could arise from systematic humiliation or insults, physical or psychological violence, or the unlawful disclosure of private correspondence, intimate material or other information about a person’s private life.
A court would still have to establish the nature of the violation, its consequences and the legal basis for compensation. The amount and outcome would depend on the evidence and the circumstances of the case.
Aliyeva pointed to Turkey as a comparison. Article 174 of Turkey’s Civil Code expressly allows moral compensation in a divorce when the conduct of the spouse at fault has violated the personal rights of the other spouse.
Azerbaijan’s Family Code has no equivalent specific provision. Aliyeva said lawmakers should consider adding a mechanism that defines the conditions for compensation, criteria for assessing moral harm and the procedure for bringing a claim.
Such a rule would not mean compensation in every divorce. An award would still require a legally recognized violation and supporting evidence.
The central problem, Aliyeva said, is not only whether the law recognizes a right to compensation, but how difficult that right can be to enforce. An injured spouse may seek protection of personal rights, but divorce by itself does not guarantee a financial award for emotional suffering.