ABSTRACT: The case concerned the claim for non-pecuniary damage based on the attack on personal rights through the press. An individual’s home address is a personal data or information that falls within the scope of private life and will therefore benefit from the protection granted to him. The publication of the plaintiff’s full address violates the privacy of private life. Nor can there be any public interest in the coverage of this information. While it is possible to publish this information under the scope of private life by obscuring or deleting it, there is no doubt that it requires compensation for not paying attention to this issue in the presentation of the news. While a reasonable amount of non-pecuniary damages had to be awarded for the applicant’s reasons, the decision had to be reversed as the fact that the rejection of the case had been decided by reason of misconduct was not in accordance with the procedure and the law.

T. C. SUPREME COURT

4.Law Office
Principal: 2014/16369
Decision: 2015/13675
Date of Decision: 26.11.2015

Litigation: At the end of the proceedings made by the plaintiff A .. A .. attorney E .. Ç .. upon the petition against the defendants H .. Y .. and others on 17/02/2014, the court requested the moral compensation; The decision of the Supreme Court of Appeals on 11/09/2014 on the rejection of the case was requested by the attorney of the plaintiff within the period after the decision to accept the appeal petition, the report prepared by the investigating judge and the papers in the file were discussed.

Decision:

1- The appeals objections of the plaintiff against the defendants, M..A .. and the other defendants should be rejected according to the writings in the file, the evidence on which the decision is based, and the reasons required in accordance with the law, especially if there is no inaccuracy in the evaluation of the evidence.

2- As to the plaintiff’s other appeal against the defendants H .. Y .. and G .. A ..;

The case concerned the claim for non-pecuniary damage based on the attack on personal rights through the press. The court decided to reject the case; the applicant was appealed by the plaintiff.

The plaintiff, A..P .. was bitten by the dog when he went for a walk, so he filed a complaint, that an investigation was granted by A .. V .., that the investigation concluded that there was no place for prosecution. Stating that the full text of the decision stating that there is no place for prosecution is published in the newspaper and on the website of the newspaper without any dimming and deletion in the name, surname, parent name, date of birth and open address. claimed non-pecuniary damage.

The defendants argued that a person’s right to be mentioned in the news text would not be considered an attack on personal rights, and that the editor-in-chief of the newspaper had no responsibility to reject the case.

In the news published by the Court in the issue of E..G .. dated 07/02/2014, there is no indication that the plaintiff’s attack on personal rights is included, the publication of the verdict does not constitute an attack on his personal rights, if the public is known in the content of the decision, he will humiliate the plaintiff. on the other hand, it was decided to reject the case on the grounds that there was no information and statement to be made and that there was no liability for compensation.

As stated in the reasoning of the court; The news published can be evaluated within the limits of the freedom of the press due to the fact that it is visible and actual, and the balance between the essence and the form is preserved in the context of the expressions used. There is no violation of the law in the visual publication of the text of the decision indicating that there is no place for prosecution. This is because broadcasting can be done in order to draw the attention of the reader to the news and as a requirement of journalistic technique. So what; the text of the decision, including the plaintiff’s full address information, which was published in the news in full, without being obscured or removed.

A .. In the decision no. 42811/06 of 09/10/2012; Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. Article 8 of the Convention also protects the right of respect for the home of an individual who is physically specific to the development of private and family life ev An individual’s home address is a personal data or information that falls within the scope of private life and therefore benefits from the protection granted to him… Protection of private life The right balance between the right to freedom of expression and the right to freedom of expression lies in whether or not the published news contributes to discussions involving public interest. ”

A .. as stated in the above quoted decision, the home address of the individual is a personal data or information that falls within the scope of private life and therefore will benefit from the protection granted to him. The publication of the plaintiff’s full address violates the privacy of private life. Nor can there be any public interest in the coverage of this information. While it is possible to publish this information under the scope of private life by obscuring or deleting it, there is no doubt that it requires compensation for not paying attention to this issue in the presentation of the news. While a reasonable amount of non-pecuniary damages had to be awarded for the applicant’s reasons, the decision had to be reversed as the fact that the rejection of the case had been decided by reason of misconduct was not in accordance with the procedure and the law.

Conclusion: On 26/11/2015, on 26/11/2015, the Court dismissed the appeal of the appeal against all other appeals against the other defendants against the defendant M .. A .. for the reasons shown in paragraph (2) above. he was given.