Exemplary divorce decision from the Supreme Court: The woman who borrowed money for the needs of the house was not considered at fault

The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals ruled that in a divorce case heard in Karabük, a woman who borrowed money to meet the needs of the house could not be considered at fault for this reason.

In the mutual divorce cases filed at the Karabük 1st Family Court, the woman's failure to return home to their mutual children living in Alanya and her debt to the market and haberdashery shop were also taken into consideration.

The local court found the man severely at fault and the woman slightly at fault in the events that led to the divorce.

Alimony and compensation amounts have been increased

The 28th Civil Chamber of the Ankara Regional Court of Justice, which examined the applications of the parties objecting to the decision, rejected the man's appeal application on the grounds that it was not filed in time.

The court partially accepted the woman's application and decided to increase the alimony and compensation amounts awarded in her favor.

Supreme Court: DEBT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED A DEFECT

The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, which examined the file upon appeal, stated that it was determined that the man did not meet the needs of the house.

For this reason, the Supreme Court emphasized that the woman's debt to the market and haberdashery shop cannot be blamed on her.

In addition, noting that the man did not file a divorce case based on the legal reason of abandonment, the Supreme Court stated that actual separation alone cannot be considered a reason for divorce.

The Supreme Court unanimously approved the appeal decision to increase the alimony and compensation amounts, ruling that the woman's failure to return home to her common child cannot be considered as a fault.