T.C. Supreme Court 4. Department of law E. 2015/702, K. 2016/173, T. 11.1.2016
* Request for moral compensation because the plaintiff’S lawyer has been wrongfully complained to the bar ( it is decided by the bar that there is no room for disciplinary proceedings)/the words used by the defendant in the complaint are not offensive – even those that are uncomfortable with the defendant’s thoughts will be protected within the scope of freedom of expression and thought, and )

* The claim that the plaintiff’s lawyer has been wrongfully complained to the Bar Association/that the words used in the defendant’s complaint do not constitute insult – there are ordinary doubts and concrete indications that the defendant has filed a complaint against the plaintiff/that the case should be dismissed )

* The right to complain ( where persons have the right to protect their rights against those who harm them and to demand legal action and punishment) – where the existence of certain signs and facts to justify the complaint is sufficient, albeit weak and indirect, / where others may act as defendants in the same event, the right to complain shall be deemed to be )

* Freedom to seek rights (where persons have the right and authority to seek protection of their rights against those who harm them, to take legal action and to be punished – where the existence of certain signs and facts, albeit weak and indirect, to justify the complaint is sufficient )

2709 / m. 12, 25, 26, 36

6098 / m. 49

4721 / m. 24, 25

Summary: the case is related to the request to pay for the moral damages suffered due to the wrongful complaint.

The plaintiff declared that he worked as a lawyer, made a telephone call with the defendant, who was a company official, in order to compromise on behalf of his clients who were dismissed from the case, but the defendant complained to the Bar Association by placing different meanings on the phone call, and as a result of the complaint, the Disciplinary Board of the Bar Association decided that

Persons have the right and authority to demand that their rights be protected, legal action taken and punished against those who harm them, both before judicial authorities and by recourse to competent institutions and institutions. The presence of certain signs and facts, albeit weak and indirect, to justify the complaint is sufficient. On the basis of these, it should be accepted that the exercise of the right of complaint is in accordance with the law in cases where others may act as a defendant in the same incident. Otherwise, it should be concluded that the complaint is used by exceeding the limits of freedom to seek rights and constitutes an attack on personality values.

The defendant is a personal value judgement words that are used in the complaint, does not constitute an insult, the defendant in the complaint in question expended by thoughts of unpleasant, uncomfortable, even the ones protected under freedom of expression and thought, the personal nature of value judgments requires the adoption of statements in the criticism of staying in limit. The request must be completely rejected, with the defendant admitting that there are ordinary doubts and concrete signs in filing a complaint against the plaintiff.

Case: plaintiff A. A. acting Attorney General K. by, defendant S. G. at the end of the trial made by the court on 31/07/2013 after the request for moral compensation for the assault on the rights of the person, the decision of 27/10/2014 regarding the partial acceptance of the case was reviewed by the Court of Cassation and after the decision was made to accept the appeal petition, the report prepared by the:

Verdict: the case is related to the request for payment of moral damages suffered due to unfair complaint. Part of the request was accepted by the court; the decision was appealed by the defendant.

The plaintiff declared that he worked as a lawyer registered with the A… Bar Association, made a phone call with the defendant, who was a company official in order to compromise on behalf of his clients who were dismissed from the case, but the defendant complained to the A… Bar Association by placing different meanings on the phone call, and as a result of the complaint, the Disciplinary Board of the A… Bar Association decided that

The defendant argued that he had exercised his right to a legal complaint and that the case should be dismissed.

The court accepted that the statements used by the defendant in the complaint filed with the bar were considered to be offensive to the rights of the plaintiff and decided to accept the case in part.

The right to complain, in other words the freedom to seek rights; the 36th amendment of the Constitution. article;”. .”has been included in the form of. Freedom to seek rights is thus guaranteed, and persons have the right and authority to demand protection of their rights, legal action and punishment against those who harm them, both before judicial authorities and by recourse to competent institutions and institutions.

Besides the freedom to seek rights guaranteed by the Constitution, it is again the Constitution “. “12. except that the article states that everyone has inviolable, non-transferable, inalienable fundamental rights and freedoms that depend on his personality, 17. in this article, Everyone has the right to life, to protect and improve their material and spiritual existence. TMK 24. in the article, the elements of the attack on the rights of persons are stated and the illegality is explained. 25. Article 49 of the BK stated that the attack against the rights of persons would be protected by lawsuit. in the article, the sanction of the attack was arranged.

In cases where the freedom to seek rights and the rights of persons are confronted, it is inconceivable that the legal order should protect these two values at the same time. The appropriateness of the less superior benefit being left unprotected in that event and for that moment in the face of the benefit that should be held more superior will be accepted. Freedom to seek rights is not unlimited as in other freedoms, and one cannot exercise this right solely to harm another. It is not necessary to have sufficient evidence to require that the complainant be punished or held accountable in order to be legally protected and to accept that this right is being used in its place. The presence of certain signs and facts, albeit weak and indirect, to justify the complaint is sufficient. On the basis of these, it should be accepted that the exercise of the right of complaint is in accordance with the law in cases where others may act as a defendant in the same incident. Otherwise, it should be concluded that the complaint is used by exceeding the limits of freedom to seek rights and constitutes an attack on personality values.

From the information and documents in the file, the plaintiff’s attorney is the defendant’s representative of the company, the plaintiff’s non-litigation clients make phone calls with the defendant due to Labor claims, the defendant filed a complaint with the Bar Association, the development of the incident and the entire petition is evaluated together, the words used in the complaint petition is a personal value judgment, S. 10. Article 26 of the Constitution. in accordance with the article, it is necessary to be protected within the scope of freedom of expression and thought, to accept that statements of personal value judgment remain within the limits of criticism, so that the defendant’s acceptance of the complaint against the plaintiff in part rather than the complete rejection of the request is not correct.

Conclusion: it was decided unanimously on 11.01.2016 that the decision of Appeal was overturned due to the reasons shown above and that the fee received in advance should be returned upon request.