T.O
\nSUPREME COURT
\n2nd ed. LEGAL DEPARTMENT
\nPRINCIPAL NO.2016\/17354
\nDECISION NO.2018\/5391
\nDECISION DATE.24.04.2018
\nCourt: Family Court
\nCase Type: Divorce<\/p>\n
At the end of the judgment of the case between the parties given by the Local Court, the sentence shown above the date and number of the defendant by the male appeal, the document was read and discussed and considered as necessary:<\/p>\n
1-the articles in the file, the evidence on which the decision is based and the legal reasons, and especially the case of TMK 166\/1. although it was accepted in accordance with article 166\/3 in the decision. according to the understanding that the writing of the article was a material error, the defendant
\nthe man’s appeals that fall outside the scope of the following clause are unwarranted.<\/p>\n
2-by the court, custody of the joint children born in 2004 … and born in 2008 …is left to the plaintiff mother. What is essential in arranging custody is the superior benefit of children. No. 4787 on the establishment, duties and Proceedings of the Family Courts
\nAct 5. in accordance with the article, experts consisting of psychologists, pedagogues and social workers within the Family Court are asked to examine and report by meeting with both parents and children.; a decision should be made on custody by the court to determine which of the children should stay with their parents by listening to the children of the age of understanding, taking their opinion and taking into consideration other evidence, while the establishment of a written provision in terms of custody by incomplete examination and research is against the procedure and the law and<\/p>\n
RESULT: 2 above the appealed provision. the reason shown in the paragraph is that there is no room for the investigation of Appeals for the maintenance of participation in the cause of impairment, and the other parts of the subject of Appeal that are outside the scope of impairment are above 1. it was unanimously decided that the appeal should be approved for the reason shown in the paragraph, that the cash fee should be returned to the Depositor upon request, and that within 15 days of the notification of this decision, the way of Correction of the decision should be clear. 24.04.2018<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T.O SUPREME COURT 2nd ed. LEGAL DEPARTMENT PRINCIPAL NO.2016\/17354 DECISION NO.2018\/5391 DECISION DATE.24.04.2018 Court: Family Court Case Type: Divorce At the end of the judgment of the case between the parties given by the Local Court, the sentence shown above the date and number of…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[217,223,251,220,218,247],"yoast_head":"\n