It means “in common imperfection”. If the person who has been harmed in a tort event also has a defect in this resulting damage, this compensation is considered a reason for the discount.

The less defective party may seek financial compensation from the more defective party. The fact that he is imperfect does not create a negative situation. But if there is a common  defect in how much compensation the judge will judge when evaluating the amount of compensation to be determined, if there is a lesser defect than the partner who is the plaintiff, the compensation will be reduced.

A party whose right to personality is damaged due to events that lead to divorce may ask the other party, which is defective, to pay the appropriate amount of money by receiving moral compensation. In order for moral compensation to be obtained, the defendant must be defective, the plaintiff must be flawless or less defective. If there is a common defect, the judge takes this into account when determining moral compensation and decides on less compensation. Moral compensation should be decided by looking at whether the plaintiff’s personal rights are damaged. But here there is no requirement that personal rights be severely damaged. For example, an apology can be written, but moral compensation in divorce cases can only be paid through money. The judge judges the appropriate amount of moral compensation, he cannot rule on enough money to make the opposite person rich.