As it is known, it is possible to request moral compensation during the divorce case, as well as after the divorce case ends. However, if no claim for moral compensation has been made during the divorce case, you will have to file a separate lawsuit for your moral compensation claim later. This case must be opened within 1 year from the finalization of the divorce provision. Otherwise, this request of yours will expire and will have caused the magduriyet.
In the case of a negotiated divorce, the parties arrange their clear and final decisions regarding the children and financial consequences of the divorce under a protocol. In accordance with the protocol prepared by the common will of the parties, it is accepted that they have Decisively resolved the dispute between them regarding the financial consequences of the divorce and liquidated their relationship. For this reason, moral compensation will not be claimed after the negotiated divorce decision is finalized. The statement that the parties specified in the protocol do not have any claims for material or moral compensation from each other will be binding on the parties in this regard.
Supreme Court 2. E of the legal department. 2014/18709 and K. Decision No. 2014/20286 Dated 20.10.2014:
SUE : at the end of the code between the parties of the case made by the local court dates and the number shown above the given provision of the plaintiff ( the woman ) or by non-pecuniary damages and jewellery, the amount of costs and attorneys ‘ fees in terms of; the respondent ( husband ) by the defect to determine jewellery, in terms of moral damages and Attorney’s fee by the appeal; the appeal hearing as required to be done; the day set for the hearing the plaintiff appeals hearing 27.05.2014 E. K. U. the deputy is here. The other party is the appellant defendant E. K. they didn’t come with a proxy. After the guest’s speech was listened to, it was deemed appropriate to leave the matter until after the hearing to be examined and decided. Today, all the papers in the file were read and discussed and considered as necessary:
DECISION: 1- ) The parties divorced by agreement in accordance with Article 166/3 of the Turkish Civil Code No. 4721 and the decision on divorce was finalized on 29.1.2010. Moral compensation filed by the plaintiff woman on 3.5.2010 ( TMK.md . 174/2 ) while the marriage union is continuing, it is based on the fact that the plaintiff woman is subjected to violence and ill-treatment from her husband. Since the divorce decision is based on the agreements of the parties, it is no longer possible for the plaintiff to claim moral compensation due to the divorce after the divorce. In the event that it has been decided to divorce by agreement between the parties, it is necessary to accept that they have Dec Decisively resolved the dispute between them regarding the financial consequences of the divorce and liquidated their relationship. In this respect, without taking into account that after the agreed divorce, compensation can no longer be requested due to divorce, moral compensation for the benefit of the plaintiff ( TMK.md . 174/2 ), the ruling of which was contrary to the procedure and the law and required to be overturned.
2- ) The plaintiff has requested the return of the jewelry subject to the lawsuit in kind, and if it is not possible to return it in kind, their price should be ruled. The court decided to accept the jewelry items without showing what they consist of and their individual values separately, “18.819 TL, which is the equivalent of the value of the jewelry in the history of the case.the provision has been established as ”to be taken from the defendant and given to the plaintiff together with the legal interest to be processed from the date of the decision.
297 of the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100. article ( 2 ). in paragraph: without repeating any mention of the reason in the final part of the provision, the provision made about each of the requests, the obligations imposed on the parties and the rights granted, under the sequence number; clearly, doubt and hesitation should be shown in such a way as not to comply with Article 298 of the same Law. article ( 2. ) in the paragraph, it is determined that the reasoned decision cannot be contrary to the interpreted decision. According to this regulation; A judgment cannot be established by referring to any document such as a lawsuit petition, expert report. Both in the decision made and determined by the police, and in the reasoned decision that must be arranged in accordance with it, the type, quality, quantity and values of the goods taken under the provision must be shown separately, and the debt imposed on the parties and the right recognized must be stated in a way that does not cause difficulties in execution. The establishment of a written judgment without observing this direction is contrary to the procedure and the law.
CONCLUSION : The above of the appealed provision 1. and 2. DETERIORATION for the reasons shown in paragraphs, 2. according to the reason for the violation in the paragraph, the merits of the trappings of the parties, the power of attorney fee and the appeal objections regarding the costs of the trial and 1. according to the reason for the distortion in the paragraph, there is no place for the examination of the plaintiff’s appeals against the amount of compensation, the amount of 1.100,00 TL appreciated for the hearing. it was unanimously decided on 20.10.2014 to take the power of attorney fee from the defendant and give it to the plaintiff, to return the appeal advance fee to the depositors upon request, to correct the decision within 15 days from the notification of this decision, so that the way is open.
You can read our articles and petition examples by clicking here.