Revista da EMERJ - V. 22 - N.3 - Setembro/Dezembro - 2020

 R. EMERJ, Rio de Janeiro, v. 22, n. 3, p. 9-68, Setembro-Dezembro. 2020  48 German ZPO 187 , which states that while reciprocity is a prerequi- site for the recognition of a foreign decision, its absence is not an obstacle to the recognition of those provisions which do not refer to asset related claims 188 . This view has been criticized by some theorists in the thought that it allows the recognition of foreign judgments without guaranteeing the corresponding recognition of Turkish in these states. Regarding the procedural aspect, as mentioned before, re- cognition can be done either incidentally or independently. In the first case referred to in the first paragraph of art. 58, a foreign decision may be sought in an existing trial before a Turkish Court by a party in order to be used either as a matter of res judicata for the subject matter of the dispute or on a question referred for a preliminary ruling by which depends on the outcome of the dispute 189 , or, in the absence of an identical subject matter and of the parties to the dispute 190 , as proof that it produces full evi- dence of its content. In any case, since there is no need to have an identity between the claim in the Turkish Court and the operati- ve part of the foreign judgment, of the foreign divorce decision, is not prevented from examining the same other claims of the plaintiff which have not been judged abroad, such as the claim of the non liable spouse for compensation for pecuniary damage or non pecuniary damage resulting from the division of marriage 191 187 German Code of International Private and Procedural Law. See, H.C. AKSOY, Impossibility in modern private law. A comparative study of German, Swiss and Turkish laws and the unification instruments of private law, ed. Springer, 2014. 188 E. NOMER, Devletler Hususi Hukuku, op. cit., pp. 502ss. 189 A. ÇELIKEL, Milletlerarası Özel Hukuku, Beta Kitabevi, op. cit., pp. 639ss. States, inter alia, the follo- wing examples: a) German A submits a Turkish claim Courts against the Turkish citizen B, claiming com- pensation of E. 20,000. B puts forward a res judicata (kesin hokum itirazı) seeking the recognition of a Ger- man Court ruling on the same subject matter and the same parties, which dismissed an action for damages for A for the same cause. If the Court finds that the conditions for recognition of the judgment are satisfied, it will reject the claim brought before him by A. b) A is filed against the B claim for fulfillment of a liability. B puts forward a set off of a similar claim against A. A in turn asks for recognition of a foreign decision that has recognized the non existence of the claim relied on by B. In this case the Court must again dismiss the lawsuit; c) The brother of the deceased B carries out as her heir the clerical suit against C, who has the same inheritance right as B’s married spouse. However, A requests the recognition of a foreign divorce decree before B’s death, and hence claims that C has no inheritance right. The Court, if the conditions for recognition are met, will reject the claim of the same inheritance right of C. 190 E. NOMER, Devletler Hususi Hukuku, op. cit., pp. 502ss. 191 Υ. 2. ΗD 25.12.2007 E.21926/K.17735 (Kazancı Hukuk Otomasyonu). Similarly, the Tribunal for the re- cognition of a foreign divorce may itself consider issues of maintenance or custody of children of there are