T.C. SUPREME
- LAW OFFICE
E. 2007/17220 K. 2008/13614 T. 20.10.2008
CASE: A. who appealed on 1410.2008, appointed for the hearing, upon request for an examination by means of an appeal execution of the decision given by the local court at the end of the proceedings of the case between the parties and the date shown above, and was appointed for the hearing.I.D. with the deputy Av.G.T. they arrived. The other party didn’t show up despite the notification. After the guest’s speech was listened to, it was considered appropriate to leave it until after the hearing to review the work and make a decision. Today, all the papers in the file have been read and discussed and considered as necessary:
VERDICT : In the event; CD of audio recordings submitted by the plaintiff-defendant husband to the court as evidence.it has been argued that the defendant’s “privacy” was obtained illegally by violating it, therefore it cannot be used as evidence;; ”it was decided that the audio recording presented by the plaintiff’s wife as evidence was created illegally by violating the privacy of private life without the defendant’s knowledge, therefore it cannot be respected,“ and that ”no other evidence was brought to show that the defendant was acting contrary to his obligation of fidelity” on the grounds that the plaintiff-defendant husband filed for divorce was rejected.
The presented evidence was obtained by a system prepared by the husband without the defendant’s knowledge in the housing where the spouses lived together. As a result of expert examination, it was determined that the audio recordings on the (CD) are original, there are no additions, subtractions, interruptions and copies on them. The defendant-plaintiff does not put forward a claim that the recorded conversations do not belong to him, he opposes it by stating that this evidence was obtained in violation of the confidentiality of his private life.
If the acquisition of evidence has occurred through a violation of the rights of persons recognized by the Constitution, there is no hesitation in the fact that it will be necessary to accept that it was obtained in violation of the law. If there are reasons for compliance with the law in obtaining evidence, then the illegality disappears. Undoubtedly, according to the Constitution, everyone has the right to request respect for their private life and family life. The privacy of your private life and family life cannot be touched. ( Constitution m,20/1 ) However, in a marriage union, it is also a legal obligation for spouses to remain faithful to each other for the duration of the continuation of the marriage. ( TMC.m.185/3 ) The private life of one of the spouses related to this area is as closely related to the other spouse, who is the life partner with whom he meets and lives together by marriage, as well as his own. Dec 185/3 ) Therefore, in marriage, the area of legal obligations related to marital union is not the private living space of each of the spouses, but the area of family life. In this area, the confidentiality and inviolability of not only the private lives of the spouses, but also the family life as a whole are of importance and priority. In this regard, the sphere of legal obligations of marriage is not inviolable for the other spouse. Therefore, suspecting his wife’s Fidelity plaintiff-defendant, both live together in houses with common spaces, a voice recorder by placing the spouse without the knowledge of his wife’s non-public record conversations thus, in breach of privacy, with the obligation of loyalty can be a question of incompatible behaviors to identify, and can not be considered where it is contrary to law. On the contrary, there is a violation of the confidentiality of family life when the defendant accepts friends for an illegitimate purpose to a shared living space related to family unity. In this regard, it cannot be said that there is a violation of the law in obtaining the mentioned evidence. Then, through the investigation and the collected evidence, it was realized that the defendant-plaintiff had taken his friends, including the opposite sex, into joint housing for an illegitimate purpose and had violated his obligation of loyalty. In this case, there is a permanent and permanent decency between the parties that will fundamentally shake up the common life and will not allow the continuation of the union. The plaintiff is right to sue in the face of the events that have taken place. Since it is no longer considered possible by law to force spouses to live together under these conditions, it is necessary to decide on the acceptance of the divorce case filed by the plaintiff-defendant husband, while the rejection of the request has not been found correct.
CONCLUSION : There is no place for the plaintiff-defendant husband to VIOLATE the provision for the reason described above with the acceptance of appeals, to examine other aspects of the provision according to the reason for the violation, the attorney’s fee of 550.00UAH, which is appreciated for the hearing, is N.taken from A.I.it was unanimously decided on 20.10.2008, with the possibility of correcting the decision within 15 days from the notification of this decision, that the appeal fee be refunded to the depositor in advance, on the day of 20.10.2008.
