31.05.2026 13:30
The Court of Cassation 2nd Civil Chamber, evaluating the appeal of a divorce case, found the man who called the woman 'turtle, cat' as seriously at fault and ruled for compensation. The Chamber, in a unanimous decision, deemed the woman who called her husband 'bald-vain' as slightly at fault.
The young woman, heading to the Family Court, claimed that her husband subjected her to psychological and verbal abuse, was indifferent and irresponsible, and pressured her not to see her own family and siblings. She stated that he did not want them to come to the house, even interfered with their phone communication, and when arguments arose on this matter, he directed unspeakable swearing and insults at the plaintiff's family and siblings, and did not allow anyone to come and go from the house.
SHE DEMANDED 100,000 TL IN COMPENSATION AND 100,000 TL IN NON-PECUNIARY DAMAGES
Claiming that her husband spent his earnings only on himself, did not fulfill his fidelity obligation by seeing other women, and subjected her to psychological and verbal violence, she demanded a ruling of 100,000 TL in material damages and 100,000 TL in non-pecuniary damages.
"TURTLE, CAT"
The defendant husband, testifying in court, stated that his wife's allegations were not true, that the plaintiff had a dominant personality, that there was no extraordinary situation beyond normal family arguments, and he requested the dismissal of the divorce case. The Family Court, noting that the defendant husband did not contribute sufficiently to the household expenses and did not adequately meet the needs of his wife and child, ruled that the husband, who called the woman 'turtle, cat' and acted contrary to his fidelity obligation, was seriously at fault.
"ARE YOU A MAN? SWEATY SKUNK"
The court determined that the plaintiff woman called the man "are you a man, sweaty skunk, bald, pompous, onion man," neglected household chores, did not adequately fulfill marital duties, and did not want her husband's family in the house, thus finding the man seriously at fault and the woman slightly at fault. The court ruled for 40,000 TL in material and 45 TL in non-pecuniary damages for the woman.
HE LOST BOTH MONEY AND HIS HOME
The attorneys for both parties appealed the decision. The Regional Court of Appeal found the compensation insufficient given the determined economic and social conditions of the parties, the duration of the marriage, and the nature of the fault of the defendant husband in the events leading to the divorce. Taking into account the purchasing power of money and the scope of current and expected interests harmed by the divorce, the Regional Court accepted the woman's appeal regarding the fault determination and the amount of compensation, ruling that 100,000 TL in material and 100 TL in non-pecuniary damages be paid to the woman, and rejected all of the man's appeal requests on the merits. When the defendant husband appealed, the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation delivered bad news to the husband who insulted the woman by calling her 'turtle, cat'. The Chamber upheld the Regional Court's decision, finding it in accordance with the law.