DNA Test
T.C JUDGMENT
8th Civil Chamber
Main: 2018/ 11714
Decision: 2018 / 18506
Decision Date: 12.11.2018
COURT :Family Court
As a result of the trial held in the case between the parties and explained above, it was decided to approve the decision on the acceptance of the case given by the Court upon appeal by the attorney of the defendants, with the decision of our Chamber dated 28.12.2017 and numbered … Esas, 2017/17686 Decision. The file has been examined and the necessary decision has been taken after the request for correction of the decision by the attorneys of the defendants in due time:
DECISION
In the petition of the plaintiff’s attorney, it was claimed that the plaintiff’s father was dead … and the paternity was requested to be determined by judgment; upon the appeal of the court’s decision on the acceptance of the case by the attorney of the defendants, the file has been re-examined since it was requested by the attorney of the defendants to correct the confirmation decision given by our Chamber.
The lawsuit is related to the request for the determination of paternity filed by the adult child within the scope of Article 301 of the Turkish Civil Code No. 4721, and since the alleged father … is dead, the lawsuit was filed against his heirs.
In the examination of the file; according to the Forensic Medicine Institution report dated 11.12.2015, which was taken as the basis for the judgment; it is understood that DNA examination was performed with oral swab samples taken from the plaintiff and …, the son of …, who is alleged to be the father, and it was determined that the named individuals may be male individuals from the same family tree since the Y-STR DNA profiles of the individuals are identical in terms of the DNA regions studied.
Since it is understood that …, who is claimed to be the father, is dead, the court should first conduct a DNA test by comparing the samples to be taken by making a conquest grave and the samples to be taken from the plaintiff, and if this is not possible, a DNA test should be performed with the person who is claimed to be a brother, while it is necessary to make a DNA test with the person who is claimed to be a brother, since it is understood in this review that the decision was made with incomplete examination in writing, it is necessary to accept the request for correction of the decision.
CONCLUSION: For the reasons explained above, with the acceptance of the objections of the defendants’ attorney for the correction of the decision, the confirmation decision of our Chamber dated 28.12.2017, numbered … Esas, 2017/17686 Decision numbered, should be revoked, and the judgment of the local court should be reversed for the reasons explained, in accordance with Article 428 of the HUMK numbered 1086 by referring to the Provisional Article 3 of the CCP numbered 6100.
It was unanimously decided on 12.11.2018 that the advance fee shall be returned to the appellant and the party requesting the correction of the decision upon request.