'Woman who does not cook' deemed at fault in divorce case
The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation has ruled that in a mutual divorce case heard in Bursa, a woman's insults and belittling of her husband, as well as her absence from the home and failure to cook, should be considered as faults that have shaken the foundation of the marital union.
12punto
The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation has overturned the decisions of the local court and the appellate court in a mutual divorce case heard in Bursa. The Chamber ruled that the woman's acts of insulting and belittling her husband within the marital union, as well as her behavior of not being at home and not cooking, should be evaluated as faults.
According to the file, the couple, who were experiencing severe incompatibility, filed mutual divorce lawsuits. The court of first instance accepted the woman's lawsuit on the grounds that the man was fully at fault, and rejected the lawsuit filed by the man. The decision was upheld by the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Bursa Regional Court of Justice upon the man's appeal.
Upon the appeal application by the man's lawyer, the file came before the 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation. The Chamber stated that although "frequent outings" or "not cooking" are not listed as grounds for divorce in the Turkish Civil Code on their own, in this specific case, they should be evaluated as faults within the scope of the shaking of the foundation of the marital union.
The decision included the statement: "It has been understood that the woman had ongoing acts of insulting and belittling the husband within the marital union, and that she neglected her marital duties by not being at home and not cooking, and these incidents should be attributed to the woman as fault."
The decision emphasized that in light of these findings, the man was justified in filing for divorce and that the conditions for accepting the divorce case had been met. The Court of Cassation found the rejection of the man's lawsuit to be incorrect and unanimously ruled to overturn the decision of the Regional Court of Justice and the decision of the court of first instance.
With the reversal decision, a new judgment will need to be established in the file regarding both lawsuits and the ancillary consequences of the divorce. For this reason, the Court of Cassation decided that there was no need to examine the other appeal objections for the time being.