Binding Status Of The Criminal Judge’s Decision For The Civil Judge
Court of Cassation 4th HD., E. 2017/907 K. 2019/6261 T. 24.12.2019
Republic of Turkey Court of Cassation – 4th Civil Chamber
No: 2017/907
Decision No.: 2019/6261
Date of decision: 24.12.2019
moral damage – moral compensation – attack on personal rights – conclusive evidence
COURT :Civil Court of First Instance
With the petition filed on 04/08/2015 against the defendant … by the plaintiff … attorney …, social
upon the request for non-pecuniary damages for violation of personal rights through media and press, the court
At the end of the trial; examination of the 15/03/2016 dated decision on the dismissal of the lawsuit by the Court of Cassation
requested by the plaintiff’s attorney in due time, and after it was decided to accept the appeal petition, the examination
The report prepared by the judge and the papers in the file were examined and the necessity was discussed.
The lawsuit is related to the claim for non-pecuniary damages due to violation of personal rights through the press.
Court decided to dismiss the lawsuit; the judgement was appealed by the plaintiff.
The plaintiff’s attorney stated that the defendant wrote an article in the issue dated 27/06/2015 of … Söz Haber Newspaper
The content of the article titled “Lord of the Flies, let’s take a look at our flies” has the potential to humiliate the plaintiff, honour,
to damage the honour and dignity of the plaintiff, and in this way the personal rights of the plaintiff were attacked
and claimed compensation for the non-pecuniary damage incurred.
The defendant defended that the lawsuit should be dismissed.
Court stated that the expressions used in the content of the article subject to the lawsuit were in the nature of heavy criticism and that the personality
the lawsuit was dismissed on the grounds that it did not constitute an attack on the rights of the defendant.
From the scope of the file, due to the column dated 27/06/2015 subject to the lawsuit, the defendant
public lawsuit was filed for the offence of insult, … 3rd Criminal Court of First Instance dated 20/01/2017 and 2015/1448
As a result of the judgement made through the file numbered 2017/114 Decision, the defendant is conclusively qualified against the defendant.
It is understood that a judgement of conviction was given. Article 53 of the Code of Obligations No. 818 (TCO No. 6098
Article 74), an acquittal in a criminal court is not binding on a civil judge.
this independence of the judge is not unlimited, but it is not unlimited in relation to the determination of material facts by the criminal court.
The conviction decision shall be binding for the civil judge and shall be conclusive evidence for the parties.
In this case; the defendant’s committing the offence of defamation is fixed by the criminal proceedings, and the criminal proceedings
to award an appropriate amount of non-pecuniary damages by evaluating the finalised facts and the claim together
It is not correct to establish a judgement regarding the dismissal of the lawsuit.
CONCLUSION:
The appealed judgement is VACATED for the reasons shown above
and it was unanimously decided on 24/12/2019 to return the advance fee upon request.
You can access our other article examples and petition examples by clicking here.