Teacher NP submitted an application to the court arguing that his colleague, his wife of 22 years, received his salary card 15 years ago and did not give it to him again, so they had a serious conflict.
After the trial in the First Family Court of Gaziantep, the couple was ordered divorced and the reasoned decision announced.
When all statements and evidence were evaluated together, the decision indicated that there was a severe conflict between the teacher pair and the following information was included:
“It is understood that the defendant inflicted economic violence on his wife, made everything go as he wanted, tried to establish superiority to his wife and children, however, the marriage union must be harmony between all, being us instead of me and making decisions. together they would bring happiness in the home, as a result of the defendant’s completely faulty behaviors it was understood that it made them shake the foundations in an unexpected way. “
In the decision, in which it was noted that there was a level of incompatibility that would not allow the continuation of the marriage, and it was not possible for the couple to continue a happy relationship after this stage, it was noted that the parties decided on divorce after arriving to the legal and conscious opinion that the continuity of the union was not worth protecting both for the parties and for society.
The court ruled that custody of the children should be handed over to the mother and 10,000 pecuniary damages and 15,000 non-pecuniary damages should be paid to the plaintiff.
COMPENSATION INCREASED ON APPEAL
After the decision, the plaintiff NP went to the higher court claiming that the 25 thousand lire award in the divorce case was insufficient.
The 2nd Legal Department of the Gaziantep Regional Court of Justice considered that the appeal was appropriate and decided that the divorce was appropriate, but the amount of compensation was low.
The circle indicating that the man inflicted economic violence on the woman when obtaining the salary card and that the plaintiff woman was not at fault, the economic and social conditions of the parties, the degree of fault in the incident that led to the divorce, the purchasing power of money, the attack on personality rights, current and expected interests violated, considering the laws, women must be paid 25 thousand material damages and 20 thousand moral damages.
The court rejected the defendant’s appeal as not being appropriate.
“THE APARTMENT WILL REPEAT THAT THE USE OF THE SALARY CARD IS AN ECONOMIC VIOLENCE”
The woman’s lawyer, İbrahim Halil Üğüdır, said that both the local court and a higher court had made an important decision regarding the integrity of the family.
“The agency reiterated that the seizure of the salary card was economic violence.” Üğüdür said: “In our opinion, the local court and regional appellate court’s approach of being ‘us’ rather than ‘me’ is an important determination in terms of marriages. The appellate court also ruled,” he said.