\u0130tibar zedelenmesi kabul edildi\u011finde, ma\u011fdurun fail kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda tazminat talep hakk\u0131 kabul edilir, ancak bunun merkezinde manevi tazminat bulunur.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Manevi tazminat, “maddi zarar de\u011fil, ruhsal zarara kar\u015f\u0131 tazminat, yani i\u00e7sel ac\u0131n\u0131n telafisi” (Japon Y\u00fcksek Mahkemesi 22 \u015eubat 1994 (Gregorian takvimine g\u00f6re) karar\u0131) olarak kabul edilir. Ancak, bu ac\u0131n\u0131n derecesini objektif ve nicel olarak anlamak zordur ve mahkemeler \u00e7e\u015fitli unsurlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rarak ve de\u011ferlendirerek manevi tazminat\u0131 hesaplarlar.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Bu “\u00e7e\u015fitli unsurlar” hakk\u0131nda, “\u0130tibar Zedelenmesi \u0130\u00e7in Manevi Tazminat Hesaplama” (Gakuy\u014d Shob\u014d: Nishiguchi Moto, Kogano Akira, Sanada Noriyuki taraf\u0131ndan yaz\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r) adl\u0131 kitapta a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki hesaplama form\u00fcl\u00fc \u00f6nerilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ma\u011fdurun \u00d6zelliklerine G\u00f6re Ortanca De\u011fer \u00b1 Yay\u0131lma ve Etki G\u00fcc\u00fc \u00b1 Failin Eyleminin K\u00f6t\u00fc Niyetlili\u011fi<\/p>\n\n\n\n
T\u00fcm itibar zedelenmeleri su\u00e7tur ve kabul edilemez, ancak baz\u0131lar\u0131 \u00f6zellikle k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli ve \u0131srarl\u0131 itibar zedelenmeleri olarak adland\u0131r\u0131labilir. \u0130tibar zedelenmesine kar\u015f\u0131 manevi tazminat genellikle m\u00fctevaz\u0131d\u0131r, ancak bu k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetli eylemlere kar\u015f\u0131 hangi t\u00fcr bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na bakal\u0131m.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Burada, “failin eyleminin k\u00f6t\u00fc niyetlili\u011fi” hakk\u0131nda, mahkemede nas\u0131l de\u011ferlendirildi\u011fini a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131yoruz.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
https:\/\/monolith.law\/reputation\/compensation-for-defamation-damages[ja]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n https:\/\/monolith.law\/reputation\/defamation[ja]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n