T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
C.A. BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/860)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 20\/11\/2024<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Basri BA\u011eCI<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Engin YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Ferhat YILDIZ<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Duran BAYDAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n uzun s\u00fcrmesi nedeniyle evlenme hakk\u0131 ile makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015fi (kar\u015f\u0131 taraf) 10\/9\/2013 tarihinde bo\u015fanma davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu da evlilik birli\u011finin temelinden sar\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 gerek\u00e7e g\u00f6stererek kar\u015f\u0131 dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Davalar\u0131n birle\u015ftirilerek incelendi\u011fi \u0130stanbul 1. Aile Mahkemesi (Mahkeme) 18\/11\/2019 tarihinde taraflar\u0131n bo\u015fanmalar\u0131na, m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun velayetinin kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa verilmesine, ba\u015fvurucu ile \u00e7ocuk aras\u0131nda ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki tesisine, ba\u015fvurucu aleyhine nafakaya ve tazminata; taraflar\u0131n istinaf talebini inceleyen \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 38. Hukuk Dairesi (Daire) ise bireysel ba\u015fvuru tarihinden sonra 28\/12\/2022 tarihinde kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n istinaf talebinin nafaka ve tazminat miktar\u0131na ili\u015fkin olan k\u0131s\u0131m a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan kabul\u00fcne ve bu konuda yeniden h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisine, di\u011fer t\u00fcm istinaf taleplerinin ise esastan reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Taraflar\u0131n temyiz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmamalar\u0131 \u00fczerine an\u0131lan karar 28\/3\/2023 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurucu dava devam ederken 25\/12\/2020 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
A. Evlenme Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
4. Ba\u015fvurucu; yedi y\u0131l s\u00fcren bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n h\u00e2len devam etti\u011fini, bu nedenle ba\u015fkalar\u0131yla tan\u0131\u015f\u0131p evlenme hakk\u0131n\u0131n elinden al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, evlenme ve aile kurma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bo\u015fanma davas\u0131 boyuncu sadakat y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn devam etti\u011fini vurgulayan ba\u015fvurucu bu nedenle hayat\u0131na birisini d\u00e2hil etmekten ka\u00e7\u0131nmak zorunda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, psikolojik olarak y\u0131prand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde somut olay\u0131n ve yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bir \u00f6zeti yap\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra mevcut ba\u015fvuruda Anayasa ve ilgili mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri, Anayasa Mahkemesi i\u00e7tihad\u0131 ve somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n da dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu, bo\u015fanma davas\u0131na ili\u015fkin s\u00fcrecin uzamas\u0131 nedeniyle yeniden evlenme\/aile kurma hakk\u0131ndan mahrum b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrmektedir. Evlenme hakk\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fme’nin 12. maddesinde ayr\u0131ca ve \u00f6zel olarak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Anayasa’da ise evlenme hakk\u0131 ile ilgili a\u00e7\u0131k bir normatif d\u00fczenleme bulunmamakla birlikte bu hakk\u0131n Anayasa’da yer verilen baz\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcmlerde m\u00fcndemi\u00e7 oldu\u011fu Anayasa Mahkemesince kabul edilmi\u015ftir (H\u00fcseyin Kesici, B. No: 2013\/3440, 20\/4\/2016, \u00a7 44; \u00d6.\u00c7., B. No: 2014\/8203, 21\/9\/2016, \u00a7 51; D.K., B. No: 2015\/11159, 25\/9\/2019, \u00a7 57; S.A., B. No: 2017\/40199, 8\/9\/2020, \u00a7 48; Sabire G\u00fcng\u00f6r [GK], B. No: 2019\/32487, 29\/2\/2024, \u00a7 40).<\/p>\n
7. Anayasa Mahkemesine g\u00f6re Anayasa’n\u0131n 20. ve 41. maddeleri, evlenme ve aile kurma hakk\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan \u00f6nemli birer normatif dayanakt\u0131r (H\u00fcseyin Kesici, \u00a7 44;S.A.,50, \u00d6.\u00c7., \u00a7 51; D.K., \u00a7 57; Sabire G\u00fcng\u00f6r,\u00a7 42).Anayasa’n\u0131n 20. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvencelerinden bahsedilebilmesi i\u00e7in \u00f6ncelikle aile olarak nitelendirilebilen bir birlikteli\u011fin ya da yak\u0131n ba\u011f\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerekir (Murat Demir [GK], B. No: 2015\/7216, 27\/3\/2019, \u00a7 72). Bununla birlikte aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 aile kurma hakk\u0131n\u0131 de\u011fil daha \u00f6nce ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen bir evlilikle ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131y\u0131 korumaktad\u0131r. Aile kurma\/evlenme hakk\u0131 ise belirli \u015fartlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yan bireylerin yasalara uygun \u015fekilde evlenebilmeleri a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan hakk\u0131n amac\u0131na uygun \u015fekilde gerekli ko\u015fullar\u0131n ve kolayl\u0131\u011f\u0131n sa\u011flanmas\u0131n\u0131 g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na almaktad\u0131r. An\u0131lan madde ve Anayasa’n\u0131n 41. maddesinin gerek\u00e7esinden hareketle Anayasa Mahkemesi ama\u00e7sal bir yorum ile, belirtilen hakk\u0131n Anayasa’da g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (H\u00fcseyin Kesici, \u00a7\u00a7 44-51; \u00d6.\u00c7., \u00a7\u00a7 51-54; D.K., \u00a7 57; S.A., \u00a7\u00a750- 51; Sabire G\u00fcng\u00f6r,\u00a7\u00a740-43).<\/p>\n
8. Bununla birlikte Anayasa Mahkemesi, an\u0131lan hakk\u0131 salt belirli bir ki\u015fiyle evlenme talebiyle s\u0131n\u0131rlamam\u0131\u015f olup de\u011ferlendirmede geni\u015f anlamda aile kurma iradesini esas almaktad\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca hukuk sistemimizde mevcut evlili\u011fin sona ermesiyle yeniden evlenmenin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funu, sadakat y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn bo\u015fanma davas\u0131 s\u00fcresince de devam etti\u011fini g\u00f6zeterek ki\u015finin \u00f6zel ve aile hayat\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fczenleyebilmesi, aile kurma ba\u011flam\u0131nda \u00f6zel hayat\u0131na dair kararlar alabilmesi i\u00e7in devletin bo\u015fanma davalar\u0131n\u0131 makul bir s\u00fcrede sonland\u0131rma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc oldu\u011funu kabul etmi\u015ftir ( Sabire G\u00fcng\u00f6r,\u00a7 44). Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bo\u015fanma davas\u0131na ili\u015fkin s\u00fcrecin ve akabinde ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilecek i\u015flemlerin hakk\u0131n \u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fc zedelemeyecek \u015fekilde uygun bir zaman aral\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ve etkili hukuki \u00e7arelere ba\u015fvurularak tamamlanmas\u0131 evlenme hakk\u0131n\u0131n gerekliliklerinden biri olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmaktad\u0131r (D.K., \u00a7 61; S.A., \u00a7 56; ).Bu kapsamda bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n evlenme hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fc zedeler bir duruma gelmemesi noktas\u0131nda devlete y\u00fcklenen pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck karar\u0131n sonucundan ziyade usul\u00fcne ili\u015fkindir (S. A., \u00a7 58; \u00d6.\u00c7.\u00a7 7; Sabire G\u00fcng\u00f6r,\u00a752).<\/p>\n
9. Bununla birlikte devletin pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerin temelinde ailenin kurulmas\u0131 ile evlili\u011fin ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesine y\u00f6nelik hukuki \u015fartlar\u0131n d\u00fczenlenmesi ve uygulanmas\u0131 oldu\u011fu s\u00f6ylenebilir (D.K., \u00a7 60; S.A., \u00a7 55; \u00d6.\u00c7.\u00a7 53). Bu ba\u011flamda evlenmeyi a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 derece zorla\u015ft\u0131ran prosed\u00fcrlere yer verilmemesi ve evlenmeye ili\u015fkin normlar\u0131n ayr\u0131mc\u0131 bir \u015fekilde uygulanmamas\u0131 da gerekmektedir (H\u00fcseyin Kesici, \u00a7 48). An\u0131lan ilkeler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde Anayasa Mahkemesi evlili\u011fe ili\u015fkin s\u0131n\u0131rlamalara ve bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n uzun s\u00fcrmesi nedeniyle yeniden evlenme\/aile kurma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddialar\u0131 \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131 i\u00e7inde bulunan evlenme hakk\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir (Bu y\u00f6nde kararlar i\u00e7in bkz. bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n uzun s\u00fcrmesine ili\u015fkin D.K.; S.A.; Sabire G\u00fcng\u00f6r,s\u0131n\u0131rlamalar i\u00e7in H\u00fcseyin Kesici; \u00d6.\u00c7. ).<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvuru konusu olayda ba\u015fvurucu, bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n uzun s\u00fcrmesi nedeniyle yeniden evlenemedi\u011finden aile kuramad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan yak\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde an\u0131lan kararlarda ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7tan ayr\u0131lmay\u0131 gerektirir bir durum g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f ve \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131 i\u00e7inde bulunan evlenme hakk\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131nda inceleme yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilmesini gerektirecek ba\u015fka bir neden de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan evlenme hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
11. Somut olayda \u00e7eki\u015fmeli bo\u015fanma davas\u0131 sonucunda Mahkemece verilen bo\u015fanma karar\u0131 Daire taraf\u0131ndan tazminat ve nafakaya ili\u015fkin yeniden h\u00fck\u00fcm verilerek ve di\u011fer istinaf talepleri reddedilerek kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir. Sonu\u00e7 olarak kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n nafaka ve tazminat taleplerinin kabul\u00fcne, m\u00fc\u015fterek tek \u00e7ocu\u011funun velayetin kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa verilmesine ve bo\u015fanmaya karar verilen iki dereceli yarg\u0131lama yakla\u015f\u0131k on y\u0131l s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bu kapsamda somut olay\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131nda evlenme hakk\u0131n\u0131 zedelemeyecek \u015fekilde gerekli \u00f6zen y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn g\u00f6sterilmedi\u011fi ve yarg\u0131laman\u0131n sonu\u00e7 itibar\u0131yla makul bir s\u00fcrede tamamlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bu denli uzamas\u0131na ba\u015fvurucunun herhangi bir eyleminin de neden olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucunun evlenme\/aile kurma hakk\u0131na ili\u015fkin devlet taraf\u0131ndan \u00fcstlenilmesi gereken pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerin yerine getirilmedi\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa’n\u0131n 20. ve 41. maddelerinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan evlenme hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
B. Makul S\u00fcrede Yarg\u0131lanma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
13. Ba\u015fvurucu, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n \u00e7ok uzun s\u00fcrmesi nedeniyle makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini iddia etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
14. 9\/1\/2013 tarihli ve 6384 say\u0131l\u0131 Tazminat Komisyonunun G\u00f6revleri ile \u00c7al\u0131\u015fma Usul ve Esaslar\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun\u2019da de\u011fi\u015fiklik yapan 2\/3\/2024 tarihli ve 7499 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun uyar\u0131nca \u00fc\u00e7 ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lacak m\u00fcracaat \u00fczerine makul s\u00fcre \u015fik\u00e2yetlerinin Tazminat Komisyonu taraf\u0131ndan incelenece\u011fi d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Nitekim Anayasa Mahkemesi Ahmet Kartalku\u015f karar\u0131nda ilk bak\u0131\u015fta ula\u015f\u0131labilir olan ve ihlal iddialar\u0131yla ilgili ba\u015far\u0131 \u015fans\u0131 sunma ve yeterli giderim sa\u011flama kapasitesi oldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclen Tazminat Komisyonuna ba\u015fvuru yolu t\u00fcketilmeden yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun incelenmesinin bireysel ba\u015fvurunun ikincil niteli\u011fi ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayaca\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Ahmet Kartalku\u015f, B. No: 2019\/39635, 19\/3\/2024). Somut ba\u015fvuruda, an\u0131lan kararlarda a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilkelerden ve ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7tan ayr\u0131lmay\u0131 gerektiren bir durum bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
15. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n di\u011fer kabul edilebilirlik ko\u015fullar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden incelenmeksizin ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmemesi nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/p>\n
16. Ba\u015fvurucu, ihlalin tespiti, yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ile 500.00 TL manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
17. Anayasa Mahkemesi yap\u0131lan inceleme sonucunda Anayasa’n\u0131n 20. ve 41. maddelerinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan evlenme hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar vermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda bo\u015fanma karar\u0131 verilerek kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ihlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar bulunmamaktad\u0131r. \u00d6te yandan yaln\u0131zca evlenme hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011finin tespitiyle giderilemeyecek olan manevi zararlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucuya net 30.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesine karar verilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. 1. Makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmemesi nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
2. Evlenme hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. ve 41. maddeleri kapsam\u0131nda g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan evlenme hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Ba\u015fvurucuya net 30.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesine, tazminata ili\u015fkin di\u011fer taleplerin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. 446,90 TL har\u00e7 ve 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 30.446,90 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. \u00d6demelerin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucunun Hazine ve Maliye Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren d\u00f6rt ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u00f6demede gecikme olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu s\u00fcrenin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6deme tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in yasal FA\u0130Z UYGULANMASINA,<\/p>\n
F. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin bilgi i\u00e7in \u0130stanbul 1. Aile Mahkemesi (E.2015\/109, K.2019\/1203) ve Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 20\/11\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 20\/11\/2024 tarihli ve 2021\/860 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 karar\u0131\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130 ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 C.A. BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/860) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 20\/11\/2024 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR Raport\u00f6r : Ferhat YILDIZ Ba\u015fvurucu : Vekili : Av. Duran BAYDAN \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n uzun s\u00fcrmesi nedeniyle evlenme hakk\u0131 ile makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ba\u015fvurucunun e\u015fi (kar\u015f\u0131 taraf) 10\/9\/2013 tarihinde bo\u015fanma davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu da evlilik birli\u011finin temelinden sar\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 gerek\u00e7e g\u00f6stererek kar\u015f\u0131 dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Davalar\u0131n birle\u015ftirilerek incelendi\u011fi \u0130stanbul 1. Aile Mahkemesi (Mahkeme) 18\/11\/2019 tarihinde taraflar\u0131n bo\u015fanmalar\u0131na, m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocu\u011fun velayetinin kar\u015f\u0131 tarafa verilmesine, ba\u015fvurucu ile \u00e7ocuk aras\u0131nda ki\u015fisel ili\u015fki tesisine, ba\u015fvurucu aleyhine nafakaya ve tazminata; taraflar\u0131n istinaf talebini inceleyen \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 38. Hukuk Dairesi (Daire) ise bireysel ba\u015fvuru tarihinden sonra 28\/12\/2022 tarihinde kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n istinaf talebinin nafaka ve tazminat miktar\u0131na ili\u015fkin olan k\u0131s\u0131m a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan kabul\u00fcne ve bu konuda yeniden h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisine, di\u011fer t\u00fcm istinaf taleplerinin ise esastan reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Taraflar\u0131n temyiz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmamalar\u0131 \u00fczerine an\u0131lan karar 28\/3\/2023 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir. 3. Ba\u015fvurucu dava devam ederken 25\/12\/2020 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur. II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-26704","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n