ERDEM-NEWSLETTER-2018-metin

391 MISCELLANEOUS On the other hand, the Supreme Court Assembly of Civil Cham- bers reached a different conclusion in its decision dated 22.3.2017 6 . According to this decision, an extramarital relationship of a married person qualifies as an assault upon the social personal values of the injured spouse, and the act of the third person who is involved cannot be separated from this assault. Thus, the third party who is involved in the act, being aware of the marriage, is also responsible for dam- ages suffered by the injured spouse. In other words, according to the Supreme Court Assembly of Civil Chambers, the defendant who has been involved in an emotional and sexual relationship with the spouse of the Claimant, while being aware of the fact that he/she is married, is liable, and this liability originates from the “tortious act” due to offence of good morals 7 . Different decisions of the Supreme Court regarding the same topic has led to a consensus of the Supreme Court General Assembly on the Unification of Judgments, and the said Assembly has decided that the deceived spouse cannot claim compensation from the third person who has been involved in a relationship with the offending spouse, and who has been aware of the marriage, during the course of the marriage union, in its decision dated 6.7.2018 which has not yet been published. Conclusion The issue as to whether the deceived spouse may demand moral compensation from the third person who has had a relationship with the offending spouse is a question that has been occupying the lit- erature and the Court of Cassation for many years, differing opinions exist with regard to this issue. Be that as it may, this issue has been resolved by the Decision of the Joint Chambers of the Court of Cassa- tion that is binding upon all of the courts, and it has been decided that the deceived spouse shall not be able to claim moral compensation from the third person. 7.5.2015, No. 6538/5839; Court of Cassartion 4th CC, 29.4.2010, No. 7418/5016. 6 General Assembly of Civil Chambers of the Court of Cassation, 22.3.2017, No. 4-1334/545. 7 General Assembly of Civil Chambers of the Court of Cassation, 24.3.2010, No. 4-129/173.