- Legal Department
Base Number: 2016/26017
Decision Number: 2017/14036
“Justice Text”
COURT :Family Court
TYPE OF CASE: Judge’s Intervention in Marriage Union
The judgment given by the local court at the end of the proceedings of the case between the parties, the date and number of which is indicated above, was appealed by the plaintiff, the document was read and the necessary was discussed:
The plaintiff father stated that the common child born on 21.09.2016 was named “…” without informing him by the defendant mother, and that a decision could be made on behalf of the joint child with the agreement of the parents, and demanded the intervention of the judge in this matter in accordance with Article 195 of the Turkish Civil Code and filed a lawsuit. ; The lawsuit was dismissed on the grounds that “according to the relevant article of the Population Services Law No. 5490, the birth notification can be made by the mother and there is no legal obstacle for the mother to name the common child on her own”, the lawsuit was appealed by the plaintiff.
From the scope of the birth registration of the parties; It is understood that the parties got married on 13.09.2014, the common child was born on 21.09.2016 and the name of the child was registered as “…” upon the application of the defendant mother to the population directorate on 28.09.2016.
The name of the child is named by his parents (TMK m. 339/5). In the event that the obligations arising from the marriage union are not fulfilled or there is a disagreement on an important issue regarding the marriage union, the spouses may request the intervention of the judge separately or together. The judge warns the spouses of their obligations; tries to reconcile them and may seek the help of experts with the joint consent of the spouses. If necessary, the judge takes the measures stipulated in the law upon the request of one of the spouses (TMK art. 195). birth notification; parents, guardians, trustees, in the absence of these, the child’s grandparents or adult siblings, or by those who have the child with them (5490 S.k m. 15/5).
There is no regulation regarding the naming of the child in the Population Services Law, which the court bases its justification on, and 15/5 of the Law. The article regulates the notification of the birth event. As the legal justification is stated above; The parents name the child together, which is a concept that distinguishes the child from other people, enables him to be expressed as a person, and helps to distinguish people in the same family from each other. However, if the parents disagree about the name of the child within the scope of the right of custody, the parents may request the intervention of the judge separately or together. In that case; While the court should duly collect the evidence presented by the parties and make a decision regarding the request, within the framework of the procedure set forth in Article 195 of the Turkish Civil Code, it was not correct to establish a sentence in writing and required reversal.
CONCLUSION: It was unanimously resolved that the appealed judgment be quashed for the reason indicated above, that the appeal fee be returned to the depositor upon request, within 15 days from the notification of this decision, with the possibility of rectification open. 04.12.2017 (Mon.)
