Precedent-setting ruling from the Court of Cassation: No alimony for spouses with regular income
The Court of Cassation has overturned a local court's decision, ruling that poverty alimony cannot be granted to a person who has a regular income. This decision will serve as a significant precedent for legal practices regarding poverty alimony.
12punto
A poverty alimony decision rendered in a divorce case heard in Istanbul has been invalidated following the intervention of the Court of Cassation. In the case, D.Z., a resident of Istanbul, filed for divorce from his spouse in family court. The woman on the opposing side, L.Z., filed a counter-suit, claiming that her husband was also at fault in the marriage.
As a result of the proceedings, the Istanbul 11th Family Court ruled that the husband was more at fault in the marriage and decided both to grant the divorce and to award poverty alimony in favor of the woman. Following the decision, the defendant husband, D.Z., appealed the ruling, particularly regarding the alimony, and applied to the Court of Appeal. However, the 42nd Civil Chamber of the Istanbul Regional Court of Justice upheld the verdict of the court of first instance.
D.Z. then chose to appeal to the Supreme Court, and the file was taken to the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation. While the Chamber upheld the ruling regarding the divorce of the parties, it overturned the decision concerning the poverty alimony awarded to the woman.
In its reasoned decision, the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation cited Article 175 of the Turkish Civil Code, stating, "In order to award poverty alimony in favor of a divorced spouse, the spouse requesting alimony must fall into poverty due to the divorce."
In its assessment, it was revealed that the woman requesting alimony was a retiree living abroad and had a regular income. The Court of Cassation found it unlawful for the local court to ignore this economic situation and award poverty alimony. The decision stated, "It was contrary to procedure and law to accept the defendant woman's request for poverty alimony instead of rejecting it, and this requires reversal."
This decision is interpreted as having the potential to set a precedent for how poverty alimony criteria will be applied for divorced spouses who have a regular income.