05.01.2026 17:37
The Court of Cassation's 2nd Civil Chamber made a significant ruling that will guide divorce cases. The Supreme Court ruled that behaviors that were forgiven or tolerated while the marriage was ongoing cannot later be considered as faults, overturning the local court's decision that deemed the woman to be at fault.
The Court of Cassation's 2nd Civil Chamber ruled that behaviors that were forgiven or tolerated during the marriage cannot later be claimed as faults, finding the local court's decision that deemed the woman to be at fault as unlawful. With this ruling, the rejection of compensation and alimony claims was also overturned.
THE LOCAL COURT'S "HEAVY FAULT" INTERPRETATION WAS OVERTURNED
The Court of Cassation's 2nd Civil Chamber made a significant ruling that will guide divorce cases. The High Court ruled that behaviors that were forgiven or tolerated during the marriage cannot be evaluated as faults later, thus overturning the local court's decision that deemed the woman to be at heavy fault.
THE PARTIES FILED FOR MUTUAL DIVORCE
In the case heard at the Ankara West 3rd Family Court, the parties requested a mutual divorce on the grounds that the marriage had been fundamentally shaken. The plaintiff man claimed that his wife was cold towards his family, expelled him from the house, did not take care of household chores, and exhibited jealous behavior.
The woman, on the other hand, stated that the man insulted her and came home late, requesting not only a divorce but also material and moral compensation and alimony.
LOCAL COURT: THE WOMAN IS HEAVILY AT FAULT
The local court, while deciding on the divorce of the parties, concluded that the woman was heavily at fault in the events that led to the divorce. For this reason, the woman's claims for compensation and alimony were rejected. The decision was not changed at the appeal stage either.
COURT OF CASSATION: FORGIVEN EVENTS CANNOT BE CONSIDERED FAULTS
Upon the appeal of the case, the Court of Cassation's 2nd Civil Chamber examined the witness statements and the file in detail. The Court of Cassation emphasized that the marriage continued for a while after the behaviors attributed to the woman as faults, indicating that this situation showed that the behaviors were forgiven or tolerated.
The ruling clearly stated that accepting forgiven or tolerated events as faults is unlawful.
FAULT DISTRIBUTION WAS REDONE
Based on other evidence in the file, the Court of Cassation stated that;
The woman should be considered slightly at fault for insulting the man,
While the man should be considered heavily at fault for insulting the woman and coming home late.
Therefore, it was noted that the local court's decision based on the woman's being considered heavily at fault was erroneous.
EMPHASIS ON COMPENSATION AND ALIMONY IN FAVOR OF THE WOMAN
The High Court also found the rejection of the woman's claims for material and moral compensation due to erroneous fault assessment to be incorrect. It was pointed out that the man's faulty behaviors violated the woman's personal rights and that she was deprived of financial support due to the divorce.
Considering that the woman did not have a regular and continuous income, it was stated that the conditions for alimony were met, and yet the rejection of alimony was unlawful.
THE FILE WILL BE REVIEWED AGAIN
The Court of Cassation, by overturning the decisions regarding fault determination, compensation, and alimony, sent the file back to the local court for re-evaluation.