Supreme Court ruling on the duty of care for a sick spouse: Found heavily at fault

The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation has issued a notable ruling regarding the duty of care and support between spouses within a marital union. The appeal filed by the husband, who was deemed to be the at-fault party for failing to care for his spouse during her health struggles and failing to support her during her treatment process, was rejected.

The elderly man, who applied to the Family Court, filed for divorce, claiming that his wife looked down on him, humiliated him, insulted him, and kicked him out of the house. The plaintiff alleged that his pension card was not given to him, his economic freedom was restricted, and that after leaving the house, he stayed on the streets for a while and took shelter in a mosque to protect himself from the cold. In his petition, he also requested interim and poverty alimony, as well as material and moral compensation.

COURT: THE PLAINTIFF IS THE AT-FAULT PARTY

The defendant wife did not accept the allegations. She explained that she was unable to care for her husband due to her own health problems, that she had begun to experience vision loss due to diabetes, and that she had received no support from her husband during this process. The woman stated that her brother, daughter, and son-in-law helped her during hospital and treatment processes.

The defendant argued that the plaintiff did not fulfill his obligations arising from the marital union, that he viewed his wife's illness as a fault, and that his staying at the tea house he operated in the mosque from time to time stemmed from his avoidance of caring for his sick wife.

The local court emphasized that living separately could not be attributed to the defendant wife as a fault on its own. Taking witness statements into account, the court concluded that the plaintiff did not care for his sick wife and did not support her in the face of her health problems. For this reason, the divorce case was rejected; it was decided that the interim alimony ruled in favor of the defendant would continue until the decision became final.

The appeal filed against the decision was rejected by the Regional Court of Justice. Thereupon, the plaintiff husband took the file to the Court of Cassation. The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation also found the Family Court's assessment to be appropriate and upheld the verdict.

Thus, the high court has deemed the failure to support a sick spouse and the failure to attend to their health problems as a serious fault in terms of the obligations of the marital union.