T.C.
\nYARGITAY
\n2. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130
\nE. 2023\/4837
\nK. 2024\/4887
\nT. 26.6.2024<\/p>\n
BO\u015eANMA ( Davac\u0131 Erke\u011fin ve Erke\u011fin Ailesinin Kad\u0131na Hakaret Etti\u011fi ve A\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131 – Evlilik Birli\u011finin Devam\u0131 E\u015flerden Beklenmeyecek Derecede Temelinden Sars\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ku\u015fkusuz Olup Bu Sonuca Ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 Tamamen Davac\u0131dan Kaynaklanm\u0131\u015f Olup Daval\u0131ya Atf\u0131 M\u00fcmk\u00fcn Hi\u00e7bir Kusur Ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011finden Davan\u0131n Reddi Gerekirken Bo\u015fanmaya Karar Verilmesinin Usul ve Kanuna Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Oldu\u011fu )<\/p>\n
ERKE\u011e\u0130N TAM KUSURLU OLMASI ( Bo\u015fanma – Davac\u0131 Erkek ve Ailesinin Kad\u0131na Hakaret Etti\u011fi Kad\u0131n\u0131 A\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131 Erke\u011fin Kad\u0131n\u0131 “Keko Day\u0131 Sen \u00c7irkinsin Ailem Seni \u0130stemiyor” Demek Sureti \u0130le A\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131\/B\u00f6ylelikle Evlilik Birli\u011finin Temelinden Sars\u0131lmas\u0131nda Davac\u0131 Erke\u011fin Tam Kusurlu Oldu\u011funun Kabul\u00fc Gerekti\u011fi )<\/p>\n
EVL\u0130L\u0130K B\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130N\u0130N TEMEL\u0130NDEN SARSILMASI ( Evlilik Birli\u011finin Devam\u0131 E\u015flerden Beklenmeyecek Derecede Temelinden Sars\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131\/Bu Sonuca Ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 Tamamen Davac\u0131n\u0131n Tutum ve Davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131ndan Kaynaklanm\u0131\u015f Olup Daval\u0131ya Atf\u0131 M\u00fcmk\u00fcn Hi\u00e7bir Kusur Ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011finden Bo\u015fanma \u0130ste\u011finin Reddi Gere\u011fi )<\/p>\n
BO\u015eANMAYA KARAR VER\u0130LEB\u0130LMES\u0130 \u0130\u00c7\u0130N DAVALININ AZ DA OLSA KUSURU OLMASI GERE\u011e\u0130 ( Bo\u015fanmay\u0131 \u0130steyebilmek \u0130\u00e7in Tamamen Kusursuz ya da Az Kusurlu Olmaya Gerek Olmay\u0131p Daha Fazla Kusurlu Bulunan Taraf\u0131n Dahi Dava Hakk\u0131 Bulundu\u011fu – Bo\u015fanmaya Karar Verilebilmesi \u0130\u00e7in Daval\u0131n\u0131n Az da Olsa Kusurunun Bulunmas\u0131 Gerekti\u011fi )<\/p>\n
4721\/m.4,6,166,169,174,175,176<\/p>\n
\u00d6ZET: Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; erke\u011fin bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015fup olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kusur tespiti, delillerin takdirinde hata edilip edilmedi\u011fi, tazminatlar, nafakalar noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131 erke\u011fin ve erke\u011fin ailesinin kad\u0131na hakaret etti\u011fi ve kad\u0131n\u0131 a\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131, erke\u011fin kad\u0131n\u0131 “keko, day\u0131, sen \u00e7irkinsin ailem seni istemiyor” demek sureti ile a\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kad\u0131n\u0131 istemedi\u011fini s\u00f6yledi\u011fi, b\u00f6ylelikle evlilik birli\u011finin temelinden sars\u0131lmas\u0131nda davac\u0131 erke\u011fin tam kusurlu oldu\u011funun kabul\u00fc gerekir.<\/p>\n
Mevcut olaylara g\u00f6re evlilik birli\u011finin, devam\u0131 e\u015flerden beklenmeyecek derecede, temelinden sars\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ku\u015fkusuzdur. Ne var ki, bu sonuca ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 tamamen davac\u0131n\u0131n tutum ve davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131ndan kaynaklanm\u0131\u015f olup, daval\u0131ya atf\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn hi\u00e7bir kusur ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmemi\u015ftir. Bu durumda a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenle iste\u011fin reddi gerekirken, yasa h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin yorumunda yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclerek bo\u015fanmaya karar verilmesi usul ve kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
DAVA : Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki bo\u015fanma davas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince davac\u0131 erkek taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcne karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Karar\u0131n daval\u0131 kad\u0131n vekilince istinaf edilmesi \u00fczerine, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince ba\u015fvurunun k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcyle ilk derece mahkemesi h\u00fckm\u00fc kald\u0131r\u0131larak yeniden esas hakk\u0131nda h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131 taraf vekillerince temyiz edilmekle;kesinlik, s\u00fcre, temyiz \u015fart\u0131 ve di\u011fer usul eksiklikleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnden yap\u0131lan \u00f6n inceleme sonucunda, temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin kabul\u00fcne karar verildikten ve Tetkik H\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanan rapor dinlendikten sonra dosyadaki belgeler incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
KARAR : I. DAVA<\/p>\n
Davac\u0131 erkek vekili dava dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; evlendikleri tarihten itibaren daval\u0131n\u0131n eve hi\u00e7bir katk\u0131da bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, evlilik hayat\u0131 boyunca ortak hayat\u0131n giderlerini davac\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lamaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131rken daval\u0131 taraf\u0131n \u00e7al\u0131\u015fm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu i\u015f yerinden alm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu \u00fccretleri ortak hayat\u0131 i\u00e7in harcamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131ya cep telefonunu f\u0131rlatt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, hatta bir tart\u0131\u015fmada y\u00fcz\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc f\u0131rlatt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve ard\u0131ndan valizlerini toplayarak evden \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, evlilik s\u00fcrecinde s\u0131kl\u0131kla bo\u015ftan bahaneler bulup tart\u0131\u015fmalar ba\u015flatt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, tart\u0131\u015fmalar sonras\u0131nda evden valizini toplayarak ayr\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, daval\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n bu t\u00fcr d\u00fczensiz ve anlam verilmeyen davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 tekrar etti\u011fini ve d\u0131\u015far\u0131da 3-4 saat kald\u0131ktan sona eve d\u00f6nd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc 4721 Say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu’nun 166. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca evlilik birli\u011finin temelinden sars\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle taraflar\u0131n bo\u015fanmalar\u0131na karar verilmesini talep ve dava etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. CEVAP<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131 kad\u0131n vekili cevap dilek\u00e7esinde; taraflar\u0131n uzaktan akraba olduklar\u0131n\u0131, 7 ayl\u0131k sevgililik ve ni\u015fanl\u0131l\u0131k s\u00fcrecinden sonra severek evlediklerini, davac\u0131 erke\u011fin zaman zaman m\u00fcvekkiline asl\u0131nda kendisini hi\u00e7 sevmedi\u011fini, sevmeden evlendi\u011fini, halende sevmedi\u011fini s\u00f6yledi\u011fini, davac\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcvekkiline ”day\u0131, keko, kanka” gibi uygunsuz \u015fekilde hitaplarda bulundu\u011funu, davac\u0131n\u0131n cinsel ili\u015fkiyi reddetti\u011fini, davac\u0131 erke\u011fin sadakat y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ihlal etti\u011fini, m\u00fcvekkilini yataktan kovarak di\u011fer odalarda uyumaya zorlad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, m\u00fcvekkilinin 26 Temmuz 2019 tarihinden beri kovuldu\u011fu i\u00e7in baba evinde ya\u015famaya zorland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131 erkek taraf\u0131ndan bar\u0131\u015fma giri\u015fiminde bulunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, m\u00fcvekkilinin yok say\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, m\u00fcvekkilinin halen e\u015fini sevdi\u011fini ve bo\u015fanmak istemedi\u011fini, fakat e\u011fer mahkeme bo\u015fanma karar\u0131 verecek ise m\u00fcvekkili i\u00e7in 50.000,00 TL maddi ve 80.000,00 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesine karar verilmesini, m\u00fcvekkili lehine ayl\u0131k 1.500,00 TL tedbir ve yoksulluk nafakas\u0131 belirlenerek her y\u0131l ocak ay\u0131nda \u00dcFE oran\u0131nda artt\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmesini talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
III. \u0130LK DERECE MAHKEMES\u0130 KARARI<\/p>\n
\u0130lk derece mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da tarih ve say\u0131s\u0131 belirtilen karar\u0131yla, daval\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n davac\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 M.’in ifadesinde ge\u00e7ti\u011fi \u00fczere davac\u0131 erke\u011fe y\u00f6nelik “Ben babam\u0131 arad\u0131m. Seni sevmiyorum, babam gelip beni g\u00f6t\u00fcrecek” \u015feklinde beyanda bulunarak davac\u0131 erke\u011fe onu sevmedi\u011fini s\u00f6yledi\u011fi ve evden ayr\u0131larak birlik g\u00f6revlerini yerine getirmedi\u011fi, davac\u0131 erke\u011fin ve erke\u011fin ailesinin kad\u0131na hakaret etti\u011fi ve kad\u0131n\u0131 a\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 uyar\u0131nca erke\u011fin kad\u0131n\u0131 “keko, day\u0131, sen \u00e7irkinsin ailem seni istemiyor” demek sureti ile a\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve erke\u011fin kad\u0131na onu istemedi\u011fini s\u00f6yledi\u011fi, yaln\u0131z bu vak\u0131alar\u0131n erke\u011fe kusur olarak y\u00fcklenmedi\u011fi \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc kad\u0131n\u0131n cevap dilek\u00e7esinde davac\u0131y\u0131 sevdi\u011fini ve bo\u015fanmak istemedi\u011fini beyan etti\u011fi, kad\u0131n\u0131n erke\u011fe y\u00fckledi\u011fi kusurlar\u0131 affetti\u011fi en az\u0131ndan ho\u015fg\u00f6r\u00fc ile kar\u015f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kad\u0131n\u0131n tam kusurlu oldu\u011fu, davac\u0131 erkek taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131lan bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc ile, evlilik birli\u011finin temelinden sars\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle 4721 Say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu’nun 166. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca taraflar\u0131n bo\u015fanmalar\u0131na, daval\u0131n\u0131n maddi-manevi tazminat ve yoksulluk nafakas\u0131 istemlerinin reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
IV. \u0130ST\u0130NAF<\/p>\n
A. \u0130stinaf Yoluna Ba\u015fvuranlar<\/p>\n
\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi’nin yukar\u0131da belirtilen karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 daval\u0131 kad\u0131n vekili istinaf ba\u015fvurusunda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
B. \u0130stinaf Sebepleri<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131 kad\u0131n vekili istinaf dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; daval\u0131 m\u00fcvekkilin bo\u015fanmay\u0131 istemeyen taraf oldu\u011funu, bu sebeple e\u015fini halen seviyor olmas\u0131n\u0131n da pek tabi bir durum oldu\u011funu, bu sebeple e\u015finin kusurlar\u0131n\u0131 affetmi\u015f say\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n hukukla izah edilir bir yan\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131,yerel mahkemenin s\u0131rf bu sebeple davac\u0131 e\u015fin t\u00fcm kusurlar\u0131n\u0131 yok sayarak, daval\u0131 m\u00fcvekkili tam kusurlu bulmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu belirterek mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcm\u00fcyle ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmesi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
C. Gerek\u00e7e ve Sonu\u00e7<\/p>\n
B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi’nin yukar\u0131da tarih ve say\u0131s\u0131 belirtilen karar\u0131 ile, ilk derece mahkemesince daval\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n tamamen kusurlu oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle bo\u015fanma karar\u0131 verilmi\u015f ise de toplanan delillerden, davac\u0131 erke\u011fin ve erke\u011fin ailesinin kad\u0131na hakaret etti\u011fi ve kad\u0131n\u0131 a\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131 uyar\u0131nca erke\u011fin kad\u0131n\u0131 “keko, day\u0131, sen \u00e7irkinsin ailem seni istemiyor” demek sureti ile a\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve erke\u011fin kad\u0131na onu istemedi\u011fini s\u00f6yledi\u011fi, daval\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n ise davac\u0131 tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 M.’in ifadesinde ge\u00e7ti\u011fi \u00fczere davac\u0131 erke\u011fe y\u00f6nelik “Ben babam\u0131 arad\u0131m. Seni sevmiyorum, babam gelip beni g\u00f6t\u00fcrecek” \u015feklinde beyanda bulunarak davac\u0131 erke\u011fe onu sevmedi\u011fini s\u00f6yledi\u011fi ve evden ayr\u0131larak birlik g\u00f6revlerini yerine getirmedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ilk derece mahkemesince davac\u0131 erke\u011fe kusur y\u00fcklenmemesi do\u011fru g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011fi, bo\u015fanmaya neden olan olaylarda davac\u0131 erke\u011fin a\u011f\u0131r kusurlu, daval\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n ise erke\u011fe oranla hafif kusurlu oldu\u011fu, daval\u0131 kad\u0131n vekilinin kusura y\u00f6nelik istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun kabul\u00fcyle ilk derece mahkemesinin kusura ili\u015fkin gerek\u00e7esinin d\u00fczeltilmesine karar vermek gerekti\u011fi, daval\u0131 kad\u0131n vekilinin tedbir nafakas\u0131n\u0131n miktar\u0131na y\u00f6nelik istinaf talebinin reddi ile mahkemece 18.06.2020 tarihinden itibaren ge\u00e7erli olacak \u015fekilde takdir edilen ayl\u0131k 500,00 TL tedbir nafakas\u0131n\u0131n karar kesinle\u015finceye kadar devam\u0131na, yasal ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015ftu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle kad\u0131n lehine ayl\u0131k 1000,00 TL yoksulluk nafakas\u0131 ile 20.000,00 TL maddi tazminat ve 20.000,00 TL manevi tazminata, daval\u0131 kad\u0131n vekilinin sair istinaf taleplerinin esastan reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
V. TEMY\u0130Z<\/p>\n
A. Temyiz Yoluna Ba\u015fvuranlar<\/p>\n
B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi’nin yukar\u0131da belirtilen karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 taraf vekilleri temyiz isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
B. Temyiz Sebepleri<\/p>\n
1-)Daval\u0131 kad\u0131n vekili temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; kusur tespitinin hatal\u0131 oldu\u011fu, karar\u0131n t\u00fcm\u00fc y\u00f6n\u00fcnden temyiz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
2-)Davac\u0131 erkek vekili temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle; kusur tespitinin hatal\u0131 oldu\u011fu, tazminatlar ve yoksulluk nafakas\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden temyiz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
C. Gerek\u00e7e<\/p>\n
1. Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k ve Hukuki Nitelendirme<\/p>\n
Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; erke\u011fin bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015fup olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kusur tespiti, delillerin takdirinde hata edilip edilmedi\u011fi, tazminatlar, nafakalar noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
2. \u0130lgili Hukuk<\/p>\n
6100 Say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu’nun 190. maddesi, 369. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 ile 370 ve 371. maddeleri, 4721 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 4 \u00fcnc\u00fc, 6 nc\u0131, 166 \u0131nc\u0131, 169 uncu, 174 \u00fcnc\u00fc, 175. ve 176. maddesi.<\/p>\n
3. De\u011ferlendirme<\/p>\n
1.Davac\u0131 erkek vekili taraf\u0131ndan evlilik birli\u011finin temelinden sars\u0131lmas\u0131 hukuki sebebine dayal\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lan bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 sonucunda kad\u0131n\u0131n bo\u015fanmaya sebebiyet veren olaylarda tam kusurlu oldu\u011fu kabul edilerek davan\u0131n kabul\u00fcyle bo\u015fanmaya karar verilmi\u015f, karara kar\u015f\u0131 daval\u0131 kad\u0131n vekili taraf\u0131ndan istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine istinaf incelemesi yapan B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince bo\u015fanmaya sebebiyet veren olaylarda erke\u011fin, kad\u0131na nazaran daha a\u011f\u0131r kusurlu oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle kusura ili\u015fkin gerek\u00e7enin d\u00fczeltilerek yeniden esas hakk\u0131nda h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisi ile kad\u0131n yarar\u0131na kusurlu oldu\u011fu belirtilerek kad\u0131n lehine maddi ve manevi tazminat ile tedbir ve yoksulluk nafakas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f, h\u00fck\u00fcm taraf vekilleri taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
2.4721 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 166. maddesinin birinci ve ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca bo\u015fanma karar\u0131 verilebilmesi i\u00e7in evlilik birli\u011finin, ortak hayat\u0131 s\u00fcrd\u00fcrmeleri e\u015flerden beklenmeyecek derecede temelinden sars\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n sabit olmas\u0131 gerekir. Oysa somut uyu\u015fmazl\u0131kta dinlenen davac\u0131 tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6zlerinin bir k\u0131sm\u0131 4721 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 166. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda yer alan temelinden sars\u0131lma durumunu kabule elveri\u015fli olmayan beyanlar olup, bir k\u0131sm\u0131 ise, sebep ve saiki a\u00e7\u0131klanmayan ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 olmaktan uzak izahlardan ibarettir. Bu durumda daval\u0131 kad\u0131n\u0131n bo\u015fanmaya sebebiyet verecek bir kusurunun varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n dosya kapsam\u0131ndan ispatlanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama ve toplanan delillerden davac\u0131 erke\u011fin ve erke\u011fin ailesinin kad\u0131na hakaret etti\u011fi ve kad\u0131n\u0131 a\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131, erke\u011fin kad\u0131n\u0131 “keko, day\u0131, sen \u00e7irkinsin ailem seni istemiyor” demek sureti ile a\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kad\u0131n\u0131 istemedi\u011fini s\u00f6yledi\u011fi, b\u00f6ylelikle evlilik birli\u011finin temelinden sars\u0131lmas\u0131nda davac\u0131 erke\u011fin tam kusurlu oldu\u011funun kabul\u00fc gerekir.<\/p>\n
3. 4721 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 166. maddesinde “evlilik birli\u011fi, ortak hayat\u0131 s\u00fcrd\u00fcrmeleri kendilerinden beklenmeyecek derecede temelinden sars\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olursa, e\u015flerin her birinin bo\u015fanma davas\u0131 a\u00e7abilece\u011fi” h\u00fckme ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu h\u00fckm\u00fc, tamamen kusurlu e\u015fin de dava a\u00e7abilece\u011fi ve yarar\u0131na bo\u015fanma h\u00fckm\u00fc elde edebilece\u011fi bi\u00e7iminde yorumlamak ve de\u011ferlendirmek do\u011fru de\u011fildir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc b\u00f6yle bir d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce, kimsenin kendi eylemine ve tamamen kendi kusuruna dayanarak bir hak elde edemeyece\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki temel hukuk ilkesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 d\u00fc\u015fer. Di\u011fer taraftan gene b\u00f6yle bir d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce tek tarafl\u0131 irade ile sistemimize ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir bo\u015fanma olgusunu ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131r. Bo\u015fanmay\u0131 elde etmek isteyen ki\u015fi kar\u015f\u0131 taraf\u0131n hi\u00e7bir eylem ve davran\u0131\u015f\u0131 s\u00f6z konusu olmadan, evlilik birli\u011fini, devam\u0131 beklenmeyecek derecede temelinden sarsar, sonra da mademki birlik art\u0131k sars\u0131lm\u0131\u015f diyerekten bo\u015fanma do\u011frultusunda h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131n\u0131 talep edebilir. \u00d6yle ise 4721 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 166. maddesine g\u00f6re bo\u015fanmay\u0131 isteyebilmek i\u00e7in tamamen kusursuz ya da az kusurlu olmaya gerek olmay\u0131p, daha fazla kusurlu bulunan taraf\u0131n dahi dava hakk\u0131 bulunmakla beraber, bo\u015fanmaya karar verilebilmesi i\u00e7in daval\u0131n\u0131n az da olsa kusurunun varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bunun belirlenmesi ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131lmazd\u0131r. Az kusurlu e\u015f bo\u015fanmaya kar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7\u0131karsa bu halin tespiti dahi tek ba\u015f\u0131na bo\u015fanma karar\u0131 verilebilmesi i\u00e7in yeterli olamaz. Az kusurlu e\u015fin kar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131 hakk\u0131n k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde olmal\u0131, e\u015f ve \u00e7ocuklar i\u00e7in korunmaya de\u011fer bir yarar\u0131n kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r (4721 Say\u0131l\u0131 TMK madde 166\/2). Mevcut olaylara g\u00f6re evlilik birli\u011finin, devam\u0131 e\u015flerden beklenmeyecek derecede, temelinden sars\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ku\u015fkusuzdur. Ne var ki, bu sonuca ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 tamamen davac\u0131n\u0131n tutum ve davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131ndan kaynaklanm\u0131\u015f olup, daval\u0131ya atf\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn hi\u00e7bir kusur ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmemi\u015ftir. Bu durumda a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenle iste\u011fin reddi gerekirken, yasa h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin yorumunda yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclerek bo\u015fanmaya karar verilmesi usul ve kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
SONU\u00c7 : A\u00e7\u0131klanan sebeplerle;<\/p>\n
Temyiz olunan B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n BOZULMASINA,<\/p>\n
Pe\u015fin al\u0131nan harc\u0131n istek halinde yat\u0131rana iadesine,<\/p>\n
Dosyan\u0131n B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesine g\u00f6nderilmesine.26.06.2024 tarihinde oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n
kazanci.com<\/p>\n
\u200bDavac\u0131 Erke\u011fin ve Erke\u011fin Ailesinin Kad\u0131na Hakaret Etti\u011fi ve A\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131 – Evlilik Birli\u011finin Devam\u0131 E\u015flerden Beklenmeyecek Derecede Temelinden Sars\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ku\u015fkusuz Olup Bu Sonuca Ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 Tamamen Davac\u0131dan Kaynaklanm\u0131\u015f Olup Daval\u0131ya Atf\u0131 M\u00fcmk\u00fcn Hi\u00e7bir Kusur Ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011finden Davan\u0131n Reddi Gerekirken Bo\u015fanmaya Karar Verilmesinin Usul ve Kanuna Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Oldu\u011fu\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T.C. YARGITAY 2. HUKUK DA\u0130RES\u0130 E. 2023\/4837 K. 2024\/4887 T. 26.6.2024 BO\u015eANMA ( Davac\u0131 Erke\u011fin ve Erke\u011fin Ailesinin Kad\u0131na Hakaret Etti\u011fi ve A\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131 – Evlilik Birli\u011finin Devam\u0131 E\u015flerden Beklenmeyecek Derecede Temelinden Sars\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ku\u015fkusuz Olup Bu Sonuca Ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 Tamamen Davac\u0131dan Kaynaklanm\u0131\u015f Olup Daval\u0131ya Atf\u0131 M\u00fcmk\u00fcn Hi\u00e7bir Kusur Ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011finden Davan\u0131n Reddi Gerekirken Bo\u015fanmaya Karar Verilmesinin Usul ve Kanuna Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Oldu\u011fu ) ERKE\u011e\u0130N TAM KUSURLU OLMASI ( Bo\u015fanma – Davac\u0131 Erkek ve Ailesinin Kad\u0131na Hakaret Etti\u011fi Kad\u0131n\u0131 A\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131 Erke\u011fin Kad\u0131n\u0131 “Keko Day\u0131 Sen \u00c7irkinsin Ailem Seni \u0130stemiyor” Demek Sureti \u0130le A\u015fa\u011f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131\/B\u00f6ylelikle Evlilik Birli\u011finin Temelinden Sars\u0131lmas\u0131nda Davac\u0131 Erke\u011fin Tam Kusurlu Oldu\u011funun Kabul\u00fc Gerekti\u011fi ) EVL\u0130L\u0130K B\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130N\u0130N TEMEL\u0130NDEN SARSILMASI ( Evlilik Birli\u011finin Devam\u0131 E\u015flerden Beklenmeyecek Derecede Temelinden Sars\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131\/Bu Sonuca Ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 Tamamen Davac\u0131n\u0131n Tutum ve Davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131ndan Kaynaklanm\u0131\u015f Olup Daval\u0131ya Atf\u0131 M\u00fcmk\u00fcn Hi\u00e7bir Kusur Ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011finden Bo\u015fanma \u0130ste\u011finin Reddi Gere\u011fi ) BO\u015eANMAYA KARAR VER\u0130LEB\u0130LMES\u0130 \u0130\u00c7\u0130N DAVALININ AZ DA OLSA KUSURU OLMASI GERE\u011e\u0130 ( Bo\u015fanmay\u0131 \u0130steyebilmek \u0130\u00e7in Tamamen Kusursuz ya da Az Kusurlu Olmaya Gerek Olmay\u0131p Daha Fazla Kusurlu Bulunan Taraf\u0131n Dahi Dava Hakk\u0131 Bulundu\u011fu – Bo\u015fanmaya Karar Verilebilmesi \u0130\u00e7in Daval\u0131n\u0131n Az da Olsa Kusurunun Bulunmas\u0131 Gerekti\u011fi ) 4721\/m.4,6,166,169,174,175,176 \u00d6ZET: Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; erke\u011fin bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015fup olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kusur tespiti, delillerin takdirinde hata edilip edilmedi\u011fi, tazminatlar, nafakalar noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r. …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-69123","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n