Flash decision from the Supreme Court for a woman who does not like her husband's salary
The 2nd Legal Department of the Supreme Court of Appeals deemed her husband, who forced her to work, and the woman who despised her by saying "Your salary is low, you earn insufficient money", seriously flawed. The Supreme Court ruled that the woman's statements were an attack on the personal rights of the husband and a reason for compensation.
The couple, who is in conflict, applied to the Family Court and filed for divorce. The plaintiff man alleged that his wife, whom he accused of "acting in disbelief", constantly despised and humiliated him by saying, "You cannot earn enough money". Defendant - the counter plaintiff alleged that her husband used violence against her. In the events that led to divorce, the court decided to dismiss the woman's case, to accept the man's case and to divorce the parties on the grounds that the plaintiff woman was completely at fault. The Regional Court of Justice, which took action when the woman took the decision to appeal, found the parties equally at fault. When the plaintiff husband appealed this decision of the Regional Court of Justice, the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals stepped in.
"The woman attacked her husband's personal rights"
Announcing its decision, the Chamber ruled that the woman who made fun of her husband's salary was seriously flawed. The decision said: “After the physical violence incident attributed to the man as a fault, it is understood that the parties reconciled and the marriage union continues, and it is clear that this fact cannot be attributed to the man as a fault. On the other hand, it is understood that the plaintiff-defendant woman behaved in confidence with more than one man, insulted and despised the man by saying that he could not earn enough money, and the defendant-plaintiff man forced the woman to act as a doorman. Considering the faulty behavior of the parties, it should be accepted that the woman is more seriously flawed than the man in the events that cause the foundation of the marriage union to be shaken. As a result of the erroneous evaluation by the Regional Court of Justice, the equal flawed acceptance of the parties was not seen as correct and required to be disrupted. In cases that cause divorce, the plaintiff-defendant woman is seriously flawed. Poverty alimony cannot be ruled for the benefit of the severely defective spouse. In that case, it was necessary to decide on the rejection of the woman's poverty alimony request, but the decision to accept it in writing was not correct and required a reversal. The woman is more severely flawed. The imperfect behaviors that take place also constitute an attack on the personality rights of the man. The conditions of 174 / 1-2 of the Turkish Civil Code have been met for the benefit of the defendant-plaintiff male. In that case, while the defendant-plaintiff should be appraising the appropriate amount of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages in favor of the men, taking into account the gravity of the fault and the principle of equity, the refusal of the man's pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages requests were not seen as correct and necessitated disruption. It was decided to quash the court's decision unanimously. "