Karınca Avukatlık

Is Committing a Crime or Leading a Dishonourable Life a Ground for Divorce?

MAKALEAile HukukuAv. Eray Karınca4 dk okuma

TCC Art. 163: a degrading crime or dishonourable life is a relative divorce ground. Post-marriage acts, breakdown of the union, and a Court of Cassation ruling. Ankara.

Committing a Crime and Leading a Dishonourable Life

Turkish Civil Code Art. 163: “If one of the spouses commits a degrading crime or leads a dishonourable life and, for those reasons, living with that spouse cannot be expected of the other, that spouse may always bring an action for divorce.”

Crime and dishonourable life are relative grounds and thus discretionary. Proving the act alone is not enough: the marital union must also be shaken to a degree that cannot reasonably be expected of the spouses. Only then may the court grant divorce. In Ankara family-court files under Art. 163, both the material fact and the breakdown must be established together.

Must the Crime Have Been Committed After Marriage?

Under Art. 163, for a degrading crime to ground divorce the act must have been committed after the marriage. Where a spouse knowingly married someone already convicted of a pre-marital offence, a later divorce claim on that same ground may fail.

The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation held that the plaintiff had married knowing of the defendant’s pre-marital crime and that the divorce claim was therefore unjustified.

Court of Cassation Ruling

“The action arises from a claim for divorce based on the spouse’s crime. While the parties were living together before marriage, a homicide was committed after remarks directed at the plaintiff wife; the parties married while the defendant was in prison for that act. The plaintiff married knowing this. The divorce claim being unjustified and unwarranted, all grounds of appeal must be dismissed.”

Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber — File: 1983/7991, Decision: 1984/7899, Date: 16.10.1984.

For an Art. 163 divorce or defence in Ankara, the nature of the crime (whether degrading), its timing (before or after marriage), the other spouse’s knowledge, and whether the union was shaken must be assessed together. At Karınca Law Firm in Çankaya we recommend reflecting those elements correctly in the petition and proof plan.

  • Relative ground: discretion + breakdown of the union
  • The crime must be post-marriage
  • Knowing marriage after a pre-marital crime weakens the claim
  • Dishonourable life + cohabitation not reasonably expected
  • Court of Cassation 2nd Chamber 1984/7899
TMK 163SUÇ IŞLEMEHAYSIYETSIZ HAYATNISPI BOŞANMABOŞANMA SEBEPLERIAILE HUKUKUANKARA AVUKATYARGITAY

Related Articles

BACK TO ALL ARTICLES
Frequently Asked Questions

Common Questions

Committing a Crime and Leading a Dishonourable Life nedir?+

Turkish Civil Code Art. 163: “If one of the spouses commits a degrading crime or leads a dishonourable life and, for those reasons, living with that spouse cannot be expected of the other, that spouse may always bring an action for divorce.” Crime and dishonourable life are relative grounds and thus discretionary. Proving the act alone is not enough: the marital union must also be shaken to a degree that cannot reasonably be expected of the spouses. Only then may the court grant divorce. In Ankara family-court files under Art. 163, both the material fact and the breakdown must be established together.

Must the Crime Have Been Committed After Marriage?+

Under Art. 163, for a degrading crime to ground divorce the act must have been committed after the marriage. Where a spouse knowingly married someone already convicted of a pre-marital offence, a later divorce claim on that same ground may fail. The 2nd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation held that the plaintiff had married knowing of the defendant’s pre-marital crime and that the divorce claim was therefore unjustified.

Court of Cassation Ruling nedir?+

“The action arises from a claim for divorce based on the spouse’s crime. While the parties were living together before marriage, a homicide was committed after remarks directed at the plaintiff wife; the parties married while the defendant was in prison for that act. The plaintiff married knowing this. The divorce claim being unjustified and unwarranted, all grounds of appeal must be dismissed.” Court of Cassation, 2nd Civil Chamber — File: 1983/7991, Decision: 1984/7899, Date: 16.10.1984. For an Art. 163 divorce or defence in Ankara, the nature of the crime (whether degrading), its timing (before or after marriage), the other spouse’s knowledge, and whether the union was shaken must be assessed together. At Karınca Law Firm in Çankaya we recommend reflecting those elements correctly in the petition and proof plan. • Relative ground: discretion + breakdown of the union • The crime must be post-marriage • Knowing marriage after a pre-marital crime weakens the claim • Dishonourable life + cohabitation not reasonably expected • Court of Cassation 2nd Chamber 1984/7899