PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 38249/09) against the Republic of Turkey lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Turkish national, Ms Betül Tanbay Tüten (“the applicant”), on 3 July 2009.

The applicant was represented by Ms A. Becerik, lawyer practising in Istanbul. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

The applicant alleged, in particular, that the refusal by the domestic courts to allow her to bear only her maiden name unjustifiably interfered with her right to protection of her private life under Article 8 in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention.

On 22 October 2010 the application was communicated to the Government. It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article 29 § 1).

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1960 and lives in Istanbul.

On 30 October 1992 the applicant, who is a university professor, got married and took her husband’s surname pursuant to Article 153 of the Turkish Civil Code. As she was known by her maiden name in her academic and professional life, she continued using it. However, she could not use it in official documents.

Following the amendment made to Article 153 of the Civil Code on 14 May 1997 that entitled married women the right to put their maiden name in front of their husband’s surname, the applicant started to avail herself of this possibility in official documents.

Following the adoption of new Civil Code on 22 November 2001, Article 187 was worded identically to the former Article 153.

On 5 December 2007 the applicant brought proceedings before the Beyoğlu Court of First Instance for permission to use only her maiden name, “Tanbay”.

On 31 January 2008 the Beyoğlu Court of First Instance dismissed the applicant’s request on the ground that, under Article 187 of the Turkish Civil Code, married women had to bear their husband’s name throughout their marriage and were not entitled to use their maiden name alone.

The applicant appealed. On 14 July 2008 the Court of Cassation upheld the judgment.

On 4 December 2008 the applicant’s rectification request was further rejected by the Court of Cassation on the ground that it failed to meet the requirements foreseen in the law and the applicant was fined the equivalent of EUR 80 (euros) as a result. The latter decision was delivered to the applicant on 9 January 2009.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e1
001-138892_a10_em1
CODE
DIRECT
38249/09
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-138892_a10_e2
001-138892_a10_em2
ORG
NO_MASK
Republic of Turkey
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e3
001-138892_a10_em3
DEM
NO_MASK
Turkish
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e4
001-138892_a10_em4
PERSON
DIRECT
Ms Betül Tanbay Tüten
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e5
001-138892_a10_em5
DATETIME
QUASI
3 July 2009
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e6
001-138892_a10_em6
PERSON
QUASI
Ms A. Becerik
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e7
001-138892_a10_em7
LOC
QUASI
Istanbul
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e2
001-138892_a10_em8
ORG
NO_MASK
001-138892_a10_em2
Turkish Government
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e8
001-138892_a10_em9
DATETIME
QUASI
22 October 2010
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e9
001-138892_a10_em10
DATETIME
QUASI
1960
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e7
001-138892_a10_em11
LOC
QUASI
Istanbul
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e10
001-138892_a10_em12
DATETIME
QUASI
30 October 1992
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-138892_a10_e11
001-138892_a10_em13
DEM
QUASI
university professor
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-138892_a10_e12
001-138892_a10_em14
MISC
NO_MASK
Article 153 of the Turkish Civil Code.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-138892_a10_e12
001-138892_a10_em15
MISC
NO_MASK
001-138892_a10_em14
Article 153 of the Civil Code
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-138892_a10_e13
001-138892_a10_em16
DATETIME
NO_MASK
14 May 1997
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-138892_a10_e14
001-138892_a10_em17
DATETIME
QUASI
22 November 2001
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e15
001-138892_a10_em18
DATETIME
QUASI
5 December 2007
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-138892_a10_e16
001-138892_a10_em19
ORG
DIRECT
Beyoğlu Court of First Instance
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-138892_a10_e4
001-138892_a10_em20
PERSON
DIRECT
001-138892_a10_em4
Tanbay
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e17
001-138892_a10_em21
DATETIME
QUASI
31 January 2008
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e16
001-138892_a10_em22
ORG
QUASI
Beyoğlu Court of First Instance
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e18
001-138892_a10_em23
DATETIME
QUASI
14 July 2008
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e19
001-138892_a10_em24
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Cassation
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e20
001-138892_a10_em25
DATETIME
QUASI
4 December 2008
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e19
001-138892_a10_em26
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Cassation
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-138892_a10_e21
001-138892_a10_em27
QUANTITY
QUASI
EUR 80 (euros)
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-138892_a10_e22
001-138892_a10_em28
DATETIME
QUASI
9 January 2009
Betül Tanbay Tüten
TUR
CHAMBER
Task: Annotate the document to anonymise the following person: Betül Tanbay Tüten