T.O

SUPREME

2.LEGAL DEPARTMENT

2002/3736 K. 2002/6539, T. 14.5.2002
Recognition and enforcement ( Turkish parties are divorced in foreign courts according to the rules of foreign law )

Recognition of Divorce Decision (rules for recognition of decisions made by foreign courts in Turkey)

Recognition of divorce decisions issued by foreign court (if the parties are Turkish, the case is dismissed due to non-application of Turkish law )

Summary: It is understood by looking at the population records in the file that the parties are Turkish. When we look at the information of the claimant, there is no evidence that he is a Dutch citizen. Even if there is information that the claimant is a Dutch citizen, Turkish law still needs to be applied. When we look at the Yabani decision, we see that Turkish law does not apply. In this case, the sentence of enforcement cannot be dismissed. Because of the recognition of the decisions relating to the bond of marriage belonging to the convention of the Netherlands 3. It is necessary for the conditions contained in the article to occur. If Turkish law had been applied for the application of the contract, it would have to be determined that it was right to decide to divorce again. These conditions cannot be addressed. In such a case, the case must be dismissed.

There should be no missing information in the plaintiff’s divorce petition.

Case: the court of local courts and the parties mentioned above with the date number of the judgment of the case made between the appeal is requested to be examined by the execution of the investigation. The parties did not come to the hearing despite the notification assigned for the hearing. All the papers in the file were examined and investigated and the case was settled.

Resolution: 38 of the Act No. 2675.according to Article (D) and (e) in accordance with the defendant has opposed the case.

It is understood that the parties are Turkish citizens according to the population records included in the file. There is no Oct of the file in the documents included in the file that the plaintiff is a Dutch citizen. Even if the file contains that the claimant is a Dutch citizen, it is still obligatory to act in accordance with Turkish law. This situation is supported by law according to Article 4 / b of the 2675 bear law. In the law that needs to be recognized, it is seen that there is Turkish law in terms of foreign decisions. The Dutch are also known to have participated in the contract with the marriage bond. Accordingly, the request for enforcement cannot be denied.

Even if Turkish law was applied for the contract, it is not right that a divorce decision should not be made. In terms of the subject matter of the case, these conditions cannot be determined by the contents of the Foreign decision. Therefore, it is not right to decide in writing when the case should be dismissed.

Conclusion: according to the reasons described in accordance with the provision, it is decided that the case should be overturned and that the cash fee for the appeal should be returned to the Depositor.