2. Civil Department
Base Number: 2016/20858
Decision Number: 2018/8072
“text of jurisprudence”
COURT of First Instance (Family) Court
TYPE OF CASE : Mutual Divorce
Made between the parties of the case at the end of the code number shown above is given by the local court dates and the provision of the plaintiff-the defendant by men against women accepted the case, to determine the defect himself, rejected claims, alimony, and child custody, in terms of the defendant-plaintiff by the woman against the defect to determine rejected claims himself, poverty and participation in terms of the amount of alimony the length of the appeal, it was thought that discussed the need to read the paperwork:
1-According to the entries in the file, the evidence on which the decision is based, the reasons in accordance with the law, and in particular the absence of any inaccuracy in the evaluation of the evidence, the appeals of the parties that are outside the scope of the following paragraphs are inappropriate.
2 – events that cause divorce by the court, the parties both are considered equally culpable, and although care has been decided upon the adoption of divorce; and the judge from the evidence of the plaintiff-the defendant does not provide independent housing against Man, his wife, he threatened physical violence against his wife, insulting, his wife, his family gorusturmed where the intervention of the family, marriage, threats and insults to his wife remains quiet to be found in; it is understood that the defendant-counter-plaintiff woman insulted her spouse, neglected her union duties, was silent about the interference of her family in the marriage, threats and insults to her spouse. Accordingly, in the events that cause a divorce, the defendant-the counter-plaintiff must admit that the plaintiff-the counter-defendant man is more severely flawed than the woman. As such, it was not right for the parties to be considered equally defective and required distortion.
3-Above 2. in the cases that lead to divorce for the reason shown in the paragraph, the plaintiff-defendant man is severely flawed, and these imperfect behaviors also constitute an attack on the woman’s personal rights. As a result of the divorce, the woman was deprived of the financial support of her spouse. The conditions of Article 174/1-2 of the Turkish Civil Code for the benefit of women have been established. While it is necessary to give financial and moral compensation for the benefit of women in accordance with the social and economic conditions of the parties, the weight of the defects and the principle of fairness, the decision to refuse it in writing was not correct and required disruption.
4-Plaintiff-it is understood that the counter-defendant man was conscripted during the trial. A man who is performing compulsory military service and has no income and wealth cannot be held responsible for alimony. (No. 5/11 of 12.12.1966 supreme court decision) While the plaintiff-defendant man should not be held responsible for the alimony measure during the military service period, it was not correct to rule on the alimony measure for the benefit of the defendant-counter plaintiff woman and the common child to cover this period.
5-According to the realized social and economic situations of the parties, the nature of the alimony, the economic conditions of the day, the alimony of poverty that is appreciated by the defendant-counter-plaintiff woman is more. 4 Of the Turkish Civil Code by the Court. considering the principle of equity in the article, a more appropriate amount of alimony should be determined. The establishment of a provision in writing without observing this direction is contrary to the procedure and the law.
6-According to the realized social and economic situations of the parties, the nature of the alimony, the economic conditions of the day, the alimony of the affiliates who are appreciated for the benefit of the common child is more. 4 Of the Turkish Civil Code by the Court. considering the principle of equity in the article, more appropriate alimony should be decided. The establishment of a provision in writing without observing this direction is contrary to the procedure and the law.
CONCLUSION:2. Above the appealed provision., 3., 4., 5. and 6th. for the reasons shown in paragraphs 1 above, the other parts of the subject matter of the appeal that are outside the scope of the violation are DAMAGED for the reasons shown in paragraphs 1. for the reason shown in the note, it should be repaired
in case of request, it was unanimously decided that the appeal advance fee should be returned to the depositor, and the way to correct the decision should be open within 15 days from the notification of this decision. 26.06.2018 (Tuesday)
