Remarkable decision from the Supreme Court in the divorce case: Keeping correspondence with your ex-lover was considered a fault

The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals made a remarkable evaluation about the messaging with the ex-boyfriend who was the subject of the divorce case.

The Supreme Court ruled that the correspondence that took place six years before the marriage would not constitute a fault in terms of divorce, and considered the fact that the messages were not deleted but kept among the faults attributed to the woman.

The couple, who got married in 2020, filed for mutual divorce later in their marriage. In the case heard in the family court, in addition to divorce, requests for child custody, alimony, compensation and establishing a personal relationship were also discussed. Following the decision of the local court, the file was moved to appeal. The dispute came before the Supreme Court of Appeals after the lawyers of both parties appealed against the decision of the Regional Court of Justice.

The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, which examined the file, evaluated the allegation of messaging with her ex-boyfriend on social media, which was among the faults attributed to the woman. Determining that the message records were from 2014, the Department pointed out that the couple got married in 2020. For this reason, it was stated that the correspondence that took place six years before the marriage could not be directly attributed to the woman as a fault.

However, the Supreme Court evaluated separately the fact that the messages were kept and not deleted, even though they were from before the marriage. In the decision, it was stated that the woman's preservation of correspondence with her ex-boyfriend, along with her other faults, should also be considered a fault.

PARTIES WERE FOUND EQUALLY FLAWLESS

Despite the said evaluation, the chamber also took into account other faulty behaviors of the parties during the marriage process. As a result of the examination, it was concluded that the spouses were equally at fault.

The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, which did not see the appeal objections of both parties as valid, unanimously approved the decision of the Regional Court of Justice on September 21.