Supreme Court put an end to the bride-in-law debate
The Supreme Court of Appeals, which evaluated the appeal of the mutual divorce case of the couple who experienced severe disagreement, brought the debate between husband and wife to a new dimension. counted forcing the woman to visit the mother-in-law and visiting sexually explicit websites as a serious fault.
The young couple, who had been in conflict for a while, applied to the Family Court and filed for mutual divorce.
The plaintiff against the defendant woman; He claimed that his wife's family intervened in the marriage, did not want him to meet with his family, used physical violence and threatened him. The plaintiff's counter-defendant husband alleged, "My wife did not want to meet with my mother, that is, her mother-in-law." The Family Court, accepting that the plaintiff-defendant man was seriously at fault in the events that caused the termination of the marriage, decided that the parties would divorce with the acceptance of the mutual divorce cases, the rejection of the compensation requests of the man, and the custody of the joint child be left to the mother. Measures for the common benefit of children and participation in alimony, compensation for the benefit of the defendant-plaintiff women were decided.
The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Regional Court of Appeals, which was activated when the parties appealed, drew attention to the fact that the plaintiff-defendant man did not want the family of the woman and entered sexual sites. He emphasized that the defendant-plaintiff woman did not want to meet with the family of her husband, did not fulfill the duties of the union, and did not take her husband into the common house in the last incident. Circle; Stating that the parties were equally at fault in these events that caused the divorce, the defendant-plaintiff decided to refuse all the appeal requests of the plaintiff and the plaintiff-defendant man to determine the fault and the appeal request in terms of compensation. When the verdict was appealed by the party lawyers, this time the 2nd Legal Department of the Supreme Court came into play.
In the decision of the Supreme Court; It was stated that the husband who forced his wife to meet with his mother and entered sexual content sites was seriously flawed. In the decision; “While it should be accepted that the plaintiff-defendant man is seriously at fault, the acceptance in writing that the parties are equally at fault was not found correct. In the events that cause the marital union to be shaken, the man is seriously flawed, and these flawed behaviors imposed on the man also constitute an attack on the personality rights of the woman. The woman will be deprived of the financial support of the spouse as a result of the divorce. In that case, while it is necessary to decide on material and moral compensation for the benefit of women, taking into account the social and economic conditions of the parties, the weight of the act that is the basis of the compensation and the rules of equity, the decision of rejecting the request for material and non-pecuniary compensation in writing as a result of the wrongful determination was not considered correct and required reversal. It was decided that the determination of the defect and the defendant-plaintiff woman's request for material and moral compensation were distorted, and the other parts of the decision subject to appeal, which were not within the scope of reversal, were approved.