In Hair Transplantation, the Front Hairline Does Not Conform to the Natural Hairline

In the decision of the Court of Cassation below, the Court of Cassation made a decision of reversal in the direction that the effect of the plaintiff’s failure to attend the ongoing sessions on the aesthetic result that the front hairline is not in accordance with the natural hairline should be investigated by the expert.

Court of Cassation 15th HD, E. 2007/1116 K. 2008/441 T. 28.01.2008

The appeal of the judgement dated and numbered above was requested by the attorneys of the plaintiff-defendant O. S., the defendant-defendant İ. B. H. and the defendant V. V. İşl.A.Ş., and it was understood that the appeal petition of the plaintiff-defendant O. S. was filed out of time and the appeal petitions of the defendants were filed within the time limit, the papers in the file were read, discussed and considered:

– K A R A R –

The lawsuit is related to the claim for non-pecuniary damages due to faulty hair transplantation. The defendants defended the dismissal and claimed non-pecuniary damages in the consolidated case. The court’s decision on partial acceptance of the main lawsuit and dismissal of the combined lawsuit was appealed by İ. B. H., the defendant of the main lawsuit and the plaintiff in the combined lawsuit, and O. S., the plaintiff of the main lawsuit and the defendant of the combined lawsuit.

1- Although the attorney for the plaintiff and the defendant of the joined case, O. S., appealed the decision in his reply petition, his appeal request should be rejected since he did not register his petition in the appeal book and did not deposit the fee.

2-According to the writings in the case, the evidence on which the decision is based, the reasons in accordance with the law, and especially the fact that there is no inaccuracy in the appreciation of the evidence, the other appeal requests of the defendants and the plaintiff in the combined case should be rejected.

3- In the report of the Forensic Medicine Institution dated 14.04.2004, it was stated that the surgical application related to hair transplantation was in accordance with medical rules, but the front hairline was not in accordance with the natural hairline, and that it may be a general preference for hair transplantation to last for several sessions. Both in the document regarding the patient discharge summary and in the witness statements, it was explained that the plaintiff was informed that the treatment should continue for at least two sessions after the operation, but he did not come to the sessions after the dressing. In this case, it should be investigated whether it is possible to complete the natural hairline in accordance with the aesthetic criteria and fulfil the purpose of the work by not continuing the treatment.

In that case, an additional report should be obtained from the Forensic Medicine Institution and the possibility of performance in accordance with the contract should be asked if the hair transplantation is continued when the treatment is continued, and the judgement should be made according to the result. It was not correct to make a decision with incomplete examination and research without considering these issues, and it was deemed appropriate to revoke the judgement.

CONCLUSION: For the reasons written in subparagraph 1 above, the appeal request of the plaintiff of the main case and the defendant of the combined case O. S. is rejected, for the reasons explained in subparagraph 2, the other appellate objections are rejected, in accordance with subparagraph 3, the judgement is accepted and the judgement is V. V. V. Isletmeleri A.S. and U. H., and the prepaid appeal fees paid shall be returned to the appellants V. V. V. Isletmeleri A.S. and the defendant-appellant İ. B. H. upon request, and it was unanimously decided on 28.01.2008.

This content has been automatically translated into English from the Turkish original.