Supreme Court General Assembly of Law basis: 2001/11-1161, decision: 2001/1152, decision date: 12.12.2001

Summary: It is clear that the defendant is responsible for the loss of the clothes the plaintiffs planned to wear during the trip and the items they planned to use. From the point of view of the elements of moral compensation, there should be no doubt how depressing the plaintiffs would be if they stayed in a foreign country for the purpose of rest, sightseeing and cultural activities, wearing their clothes from the first day. Moreover, when looking at the activities they aim for from the trip, considering that they require special clothes, such as opera and ballet, it is appropriate for the normal course of life to gradually turn this depression into pain and suffering. In this respect, the loss of the claimants has ceased to be the damage to their property and has now manifested itself as the haledar of the business benefits.
It is necessary to express immediately that the thin boundary between the concept of personal benefit as an asset and the concept of property damage should not be overlooked. The determination of this limit must be within legal limits. The point that requires moral compensation here is the loss of moments of personal importance that will not be repeated due to the lack of use of these items beyond the sorrow arising from the loss of the items. It’s a jolt in the human spirit world.

(743 P. K. m. 24) (818 P.K. m. 49, 98) (HGK. 11.4.2001 T. 2001/15-331 E. 2001/340 K.) (GCM. 13.6.2001 T. 2001/15-498 E. 2001/508 K.)
Case: at the end of the trial due to the “financial and moral compensation” case between the parties; Istanbul First Instance 3. On the request of the attorney of the plaintiffs to review the decision no.1174-1394 and 29.12.1999 issued by the Commercial Court on the rejection of the case, the Court of Cassation 11. With the decree of the law office dated 1.5.2000 and numbered 2691-3732, ( … in accordance with the agreement agreed with the company, the defendant departs for Prague for a four-day Prague holiday.; however, because their suitcases were lost on this journey, they did not attend events requiring clothes and had an unhappy holiday, suggesting a total of $ 1,520 in material and £ 7,750,000,000. he demanded and sued the collection of the non-pecuniary compensation from the defendant with interest.
The acting defendant requested a dismissal of the case, arguing that there were no conditions to seek moral compensation.
According to the evidence collected by the court, it was decided that there was no place to decide on the request for pecuniary compensation, and that the request for pecuniary compensation was refused on the grounds that the pecuniary compensation had been paid at the trial stage and that the conditions for non-pecuniary compensation had not occurred.
The plaintiffs ‘ attorney appealed the decision.
The plaintiffs asserted that they suffered sorrow and distress especially in the country where they went due to the loss of their clothing, and the defendant paid the portion of the request for material damage at the trial stage and accepted the responsibility of the plaintiffs for the loss of the clothes they planned to wear during the tour. In this case, the court will issue a notice to the BK.considering that the conditions in Article 49 of the court have occurred, it is necessary to rule on a suitable amount of non-pecuniary compensation for the benefit of the plaintiffs, and therefore the decision should be overturned for the benefit of the plaintiffs, since the provision was not seen in writing…) on the grounds that the case was overturned and
Appellant: acting plaintiffs
The law was examined by the General Assembly after it was understood that the decision to resist was appealed during its time and the papers in the file were read.:
Verdict: the case is related to the claim for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages arising from the air transport contract.
The plaintiffs ‘attorney, who has a very high standard of living, loves travel and gives great importance to his clients’ program for cultural-dominated Prague travel, is out of case P. the company signing an agreement with the defendant in accordance with this Agreement and with the airlines move to Prague, but for this trip, taking in 5 day private belongings and clothes in the luggage is lost and cannot be found at the beginning of the trip of attending any cultural event because programmed, planned months in advance, so your dream vacation become a nightmare, discomfort, distress, pain, and passed with psychological disorders; us $ 1.520 material, 7.750.000.000 total TL. he requested that the defendant receive the non-pecuniary compensation with interest and that the summary of the sentence be published in the three-day newspaper with high circulation.
The acting defendant accepted and paid the claim for pecuniary compensation, but argued that there were no conditions to seek non-pecuniary compensation, dismissing the case.
The court decided that there was no place to rule because the material compensation had been paid at the trial stage, and the moral compensation was rejected because the legal conditions had not been established, the decision by the special office on the appeal of the plaintiffs ‘ attorney was overturned from the point of moral compensation, and the court resisted the previous decision. The decision to resist was appealed by the plaintiffs ‘ attorney.
The dispute is at the point of non-pecuniary compensation. It is useful to determine and examine the cases on which the plaintiff’s claim for moral compensation is based.
In all the petitions of the plaintiff party in the proceedings and stages, the basis of the claim for moral compensation is not just the loss of goods, but the loss of lost and irreparable moments.
It is an air transport contract based on the relationship between the parties. In addition to the transportation of the passenger to his destination, this agreement includes the safe transportation of the passenger’s accompanying goods. This matter is determined by international rules and special arrangements have been made for financial compensation. In terms of non-pecuniary compensation, the solution remains to the relevant provisions of the law of Obligations, which is the National Law.
First, it should be noted that the code of obligations is 98. Article 2. in its paragraph, the provision” provisions related to trustee liability from torts shall be applied to opposing actions in comparison to akde ” is included, and with this provision it is accepted that non-pecuniary compensation may be ruled for acts contrary to the contract. This fact is in accordance with the law and the established case law of the Supreme Court and the predominant views in the doctrine.
However, the existence of a mere breach of contract is not sufficient for the acceptance of the claim for moral compensation, but also because of the nature of the breach or special circumstances, the Civil Code of the civil rights of the plaintiff.24. Article 41 of the Code of Obligations. in the sense of the clause, it must carry the nature of unfair action. Today’s conditions reveal the need for a multi-faceted consideration of the concept of assault on personal rights and the destruction of these rights. Because the developments in communication, transportation, technology and the priorities in daily life have made personality rights even more important and in a way have narrowed the Shield of protection considerably. As a result, the protection of personality rights has become increasingly important. Legal approaches to further widening the limits of non-pecuniary compensation have also emerged as a result.
In light of these explanations, it is clear that the defendant is responsible for the loss of the clothes the plaintiffs planned to wear during the trip and the items they planned to use. From the point of view of the elements of moral compensation, there should be no doubt how depressing the plaintiffs would be if they stayed in a foreign country for the purpose of rest, sightseeing and cultural activities, wearing their clothes from the first day. Moreover, when looking at the activities they aim for from the trip, considering that they require special clothes, such as opera and ballet, it is appropriate for the normal course of life to gradually turn this depression into pain and suffering. In this respect, the loss of the claimants has ceased to be the damage to their property and has now manifested itself as the haledar of the business benefits.
It is necessary to express immediately that the thin boundary between the concept of personal benefit as an asset and the concept of property damage should not be overlooked. The determination of this limit must be within legal limits.
The point that requires moral compensation here is the loss of moments of personal importance that will not be repeated due to the lack of use of these items beyond the sorrow arising from the loss of the items. It’s a jolt in the human spirit world.
This approach towards non-pecuniary compensation was also adopted in the resolutions of the General Assembly of law 11.4.2001 days and 2001/15-331 basis, 340; 13.6.2001 days and 2001/15-498 basis, 2001/508.
It was not considered right to resist in the old decision on the grounds that the demand was limited only by the sadness arising from the loss of goods and that it did not fall under the concept of personal benefits being haleldar. The decision should therefore be overturned.
Conclusion: it was decided unanimously on 12.12.2001 that, with the acceptance of the appeal objections of the plaintiffs ‘ attorney, the decision to resist was broken in the order of breaking the special circle and for the reasons shown above, and that, upon request, the Advance Fee for the appeal was returned.