Istanbul Law Review

SUBMITINFORMATION
EnglishTürkçe

Research Article


DOI :10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006   IUP :10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006    Full Text (PDF)

Debtor’s Default in Joint Indebtedness which Occurs within A Contractual Framework

Davut Armağan

More than one debtor can take part at the debtor side in a debt relationship. One of the situations where more debtor takes part against the creditor is the joint indebtedness. Joint indebtedness can arise from the will of binding parties as well as the regulations regarding joint indebtedness. Becoming joint debtors against a creditor within a framework of contractual relationship can occur when debtors reveal their wills in this direction. Furthermore, becoming joint debtors in a contractual framework can occur also by law, even if joint debtors do not have such will. It is possible that the joint debtors do not perform on time who incurs a contractual debt. In such cases, default of joint debtors is in question. Independent consideration of conditions and results of the default of joint debtors is the main rule. But there are also exceptions about this main rule. The aim of this work is the determination of the conditions of the default of joint debtor/debtors in joint indebtedness, which occurs within a contractual framework and examination of the results of the default when one, some or all of joint debtors incur in default. 

Keywords: Joint indebtedness, Joint debtor, Default, Contract, Compensation
DOI :10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006   IUP :10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006    Full Text (PDF)

Sözleşmesel Çerçevede Meydana Gelen Müteselsil Borçlulukta Borçlu Temerrüdü

Davut Armağan

Bir borç ilişkisinin borçlu tarafında birden fazla borçlu yer alabilir. Alacaklı karşısında birden fazla borçlunun yer alabildiği hallerden biri de müteselsil borçluluk halidir. Müteselsil borçluluk borç altına giren tarafların iradesinden kaynaklanabileceği gibi, kanunlarda müteselsil borçluluğa ilişkin kabul edilmiş düzenlemelerden de kaynaklanabilir. Borçluların sözleşmesel bir ilişki çerçevesinde alacaklı karşısında müteselsil borçlu olmaları, iradelerini bu yönde ortaya koymaları halinde meydana gelebilir. Öte yandan tarafların bu yönde açık bir iradeleri olmasa dahi kanun gereği sözleşmesel çerçevede müteselsil borçlu olma gündeme gelebilir. Bütün bu hallerde sözleşmesel olarak alacaklıya karşı borç altına giren müteselsil borçluların edimlerini zamanında ifa etmemeleri mümkündür. Bu durumda müteselsil borçluların temerrüdü söz konusu olur. Müteselsil borçluların temerrüdü bakımından temel kural, bunun şartları ve sonuçlarının her bir borçlu bakımından bağımsız olarak değerlendirilmesidir. Ancak bu temel kuralın istisnaları da bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, sözleşmesel çerçevede meydana gelen müteselsil borçlulukta müteselsil borçlunun/borçluların temerrüdünün gerçekleşme şartlarının neler olduğunun tespiti ve müteselsil borçlulardan birinin, birkaçının veya tamamının temerrüdü halinde bu temerrüdün sonuçlarının neler olduğunun incelenmesidir.  

Keywords: Müteselsil borçluluk, Müteselsil borçlu, Temerrüt, Sözleşme, Tazminat

EXTENDED ABSTRACT


All debtors are liable for all of the obligations in joint indebtedness. Also, the creditor has the right to claim this from one, some or all of the debtors. Joint indebtedness can arise from the regulations or wills of the parties. The coming together of joint debtors in a contractual framework also can arise from both the regulations and wills of the parties. In all these cases, if joint debtors do not perform on time, then default of joint debtors is mentioned. Obligations of joint debtors are relatively independent from each other. As a result of this, principally action of a joint debtor has effect only on that joint debtor. Accordingly, default of a joint debtor has only effect only on this debtor who is in default. But exceptionally, it is possible that the parties can agree that responsibility of all joint debtors from the results of default of a particular joint debtor. Obligations of joint debtors can fall due on different dates, and accordingly, default dates can differ when performance times of joint debtors are different from each other. If one of the joint debtors has a right to avoid performance, this prevents this debtor from debtor’s default. Notice principally causes the default of the debtor who has received notice. But a contra agreement regarding this is also possible. If there is a situation which makes notice unnecessary for a joint debtor, this debtor falls into default without a notice. The performance of the obligation must be possible for the occurrence of the default. If the object of the performance is impossible in terms of all debtors, all debtors get out of their debts. If the object of performance becomes impossible with a fault of a joint debtor, all joint debtors must be responsible de lege ferenda. If one of the joint debtors puts a creditor to creditor’s default, other joint debtors also benefit from this situation. Compensation of delay, which is a general result of debtor’s default, can only be demanded from the joint debtor who is in default. If more than one joint debtor falls in default because of their fault, these are jointly responsible for the compensation of delay. Even if one joint debtor who does not fall in default, distinguishes obligation with performance, compensation of delay can still be demanded from the joint debtor who falls in default. If a force majeure or fortuitous events occur during the period of default of one joint debtor, this joint debtor is responsible for this situation. If the same situation occurs during the period of default of more than one joint debtor, these are jointly responsible. If one of the joint debtors of a pecuniary obligation falls into default, this debtor is obliged to pay interest for the default. If more than one joint debtor falls into default, these are jointly responsible. But at this point, default dates, interest rates and the capital debt have importance. Because according to these elements, the amount of interest for default can differ. Therefore, a distinction must be made during the consideration of the jointly responsible parts of the debt. If the creditor still has a damage which does not compensate with the interest for default, it can be claimed from the joint debtor who falls into default with fault. In bilateral contracts the creditor, who wants extra rights to benefit, should give an extra period of time to the joint debtor who falls into default. This time periods must be reasonable for each joint debtor. It can be situations in which the creditor should give an extra period of time to some joint debtors while it is not necessary to give to the others, according to TCO Art. 123. When the creditor makes choice, this has only effect for the joint debtor which this right turns to. Compensation for damage for non-performance can only be demanded from the joint debtor who falls into default with fault. If other join debtors who do not fall into default, distinguish the obligation, this compensation cannot be demanded from the debtor who is in default. If more than one joint debtor falls into default with fault, these joint debtors are responsible for the compensation for damage for nonperformance of obligation. Withdrawal from the contract is possible when all joint debtors incur in default. The creditor must declare his withdrawal will to all joint debtors. 


PDF View

References

  • Akıntürk T, Müteselsil Borçluluk (AÜHF Yayınları 1971). google scholar
  • Akkanat H, ‘İfada Gecikme ve Borçlu Temerrüdü’, Prof. Dr. M. Kemal Oğuzman’ın Anısına Armağan (Beta 2000). google scholar
  • Arat A, ‘Müteselsil Borçlarda Alacaklı ile Borçlular Arasındaki İlişkinin Hüküm ve Sonuçları’ (2018) 26(2) SÜHFD 325. google scholar
  • Arsebük E, Borçlar Hukuku C. 1 ve C. 2 (3rd edn, Güney Matbaacılık ve Gazetecilik 1950). google scholar
  • Aydın Ünver T, ‘Tacirler Arası İhbar ve İhtarlara İlişkin Şeklin Hukuki Niteliği’, Prof. Dr. Hasan Erman’a Armağan (Der 2015). google scholar
  • Ayrancı H, Türk Borçlar Hukukunda Munzam Zarar (BK m 105) (Yetkin 2006). Bahadır Z, ‘Sözleşmenin Devri ve Sözleşmeye Katılma’ (2013) 17(3) Gazi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 1. google scholar
  • Barlas N, Para Borçlarının İfasında Borçlunun Temerrüdü ve Bu Temerrüt Açısından Düzenlenen Genel Sonuçlar (Kazancı 1992). google scholar
  • Becker H, Berner Kommentar,B. VI, Obligationenrecht Allgemeine Bestimmungen, Art. 1-183 OR (2nd edn, Stämpfli 1945). google scholar
  • Berger B, Allgemeines Schuldrecht (3rd edn, Stämpfli 2018). google scholar
  • Bozer A, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler (2nd edn, Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Araştırma Enstitüsü 2007). google scholar
  • Brox H and Walker Wolf-Dietrich, Allgemeines Schuldrecht (39th edn, C.H. Beck 2015). google scholar
  • Bucher E, Schweizerisches Obligationenrecht: Allgemeiner Teil ohne Deliktsrecht (2.th edn, Schulthess 1988). google scholar
  • Buz V, Borçlunun Temerrüdünde Sözleşmeden Dönme (Tıpkı Basım, Yetkin 2014). google scholar
  • Büren Bv, Schweizerisches Obligationenrecht Allgemeiner Teil (Schultess & Co 1964). google scholar
  • Canbolat F, ‘Müteselsil Borcun Sona Erme Nedenleri: Borçlar Kanunu Tasarısı’ndaki İlgili Hükümlerin Kısa Değerlendirilmesi ile Birlikte’ (Yaz 2008) 66(3) ABD 68. google scholar
  • Canyürek M, Müteselsil Borçlulukta İç ve Dış İlişkiler (Vedat Kitapçılık 2003). google scholar
  • Dağdelen AH, 818 ve 6098 Sayılı Borçlar Kanunlarında Borçlular Arasında Teselsül (On İki Levha 2011). google scholar
  • Dalamanlı L, Kazancı F and Kazancı M, İlmi ve Kazai İçtihatlarla Açıklamalı Borçlar Kanunu C. 2 (Kazancı 1990). google scholar
  • Doğan G, ‘Sürekli Borç İlişkilerinde Borçlunun Temerrüdü’ [72] ABD 385. google scholar
  • Edgü E, Borçlar Hukuku Umumi Hükümler (İ.İ.T.İ.A Nihat Sayar Yayın ve Yardım Vakfı 1978). google scholar
  • Erdem M, Özel Hukukta Zamanaşımı (1st edn, On İki Levha 2010). google scholar
  • Erdoğan İ, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler (3rd edn, Gazi Kitabevi 2017). google scholar
  • Eren F, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler (23. baskı, Yetkin 2018). google scholar
  • Erlüle F, ‘Müteselsil Kefalet ve Müteselsil Borçluluk Kavramlarının Karşılaştırılması’ (2003) 7(12) AÜEHFD 629. google scholar
  • Feyzioğlu FN, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler, C. 2 (2nd edn, İÜHF Yayınları 1977). google scholar
  • Fikentscher W and Heinemann A, Schuldrecht Allgemeiner und Besonderer Teil (11.th edn, De Gruyter 2017). google scholar
  • Funk F, Borçlar Kanunu Şerhi I Umumi Hükümler (Üniversite Kitabevi n.d). Furrer A and Müller-Chen M, Obligationenrecht, Allgemeiner Teil (3rd edn, Schulthess 2018). google scholar
  • Gauch P, Schluep WR and Emmenegger S, Schweizerisches Obligationenrecht, Allgemeiner Teil, B. 2 (10th edn, Schulthess 2014). google scholar
  • Gautschi A, Solidarschuld und Ausgleich (Dike 2009). google scholar
  • Göktürk HA, Borçlar Hukuku, Birinci Kısım, Borçların Umumi Hükümleri (1946). google scholar
  • Graber CK, ‘Art. 143-150’ in Heinrich Honsell, Nedim P Vogt and Wolfgang Wiegand (eds), Basler Kommentar, Obligationenrecht I, Art. 1-529 OR (6th edn. Helbing Lichtenhahn Verlag 2015). google scholar
  • Guhl T, Das Schweizerische Obligationenrecht : mit Einschluss des Handels- und Wertpapierrechts (9th edn, Schulthess 2000). google scholar
  • Hatemi H and Gökyayla E, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Bölüm (4th edn, Vedat Kitapçılık 2017). google scholar
  • Havutçu A, Tam İki Tarafa Borç Yükleyen Sözleşmelerde Temerrüt ve Müsbet Zararın Tazmini (Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Döner Sermaye İşletmesi Yayınları 1995). google scholar
  • Huguenin C, Obligationenrecht Allgemeiner und Besonderer Teil (2nd edn, Schulthess 2014). google scholar
  • İnan AN and Yücel Ö, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler (4th edn, Seçkin 2014). google scholar
  • İyimaya A, ‘Zincirleme Sorumlulardan Yalnızca Biri Aleyhine Açılan Davada ‘Zincirleme Sorumluluk Kaydı’nın Yeralması Zorunlu Mudur?’ [1995] TBBD 378. google scholar
  • Jung P, ‘Art. 143-150’ in Heinrich Honsell (ed), Kurzkommentar OR (Helbing Lichtenhahn 2014). google scholar
  • Kaniti S, Akdin İfa Edilmediği Def’i (İÜHF Yayınları 1962). google scholar
  • Kapancı KB, Birlikte Borçlulukta Borçlular Arası İlişkiler (2.th edn, Vedat Kitapçılık 2014). google scholar
  • Karabağ Bulut N, ‘Tacirler Arası İhbar ve İhtarlar Bakımından Getirilen Şeklin Geçerlilik Veya İspat Şartı Şeklinde Nitelendirilmesine Bağlı Olarak Doğuracağı Hukuki Sonuçlar’, Prof. Dr. Hasan Erman’a Armağan (Der 2015). google scholar
  • Karahasan MR, Türk Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler, C. 2 (Beta 2003). google scholar
  • Keller M and Schöbi Christian, Das Schweizerische Schuldrecht, B. 4, Gemeinsame Rechtsinstitute für Schuldverhältnisse aus Vertrag, unerlaubter Handlung und ungerechtfertigter Bereicherung (2nd edn, Helbing Lichtenhahn 1985). google scholar
  • • Keller, Max/Schöbi, Christian, Das Schweizerische Schuldrecht, B. 1, Allgemeine Lehren des Vertragrechts (3rd edn, Helbing Lichtenhahn 1988). google scholar
  • Kılıçoğlu A, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler (22nd edn, Turhan 2018). google scholar
  • Kırca Ç, ‘Müteselsil Sorumlulukta Borçlar Kanunu Tasarısı ile Getirilen Değişiklikler’, Prof. Dr. Fikret Eren’e Armağan (Yetkin 2006). google scholar
  • Kocayusufpaşaoğlu N and others, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Bölüm, C. 1 (5th edn, Filiz Kitabevi 2010). google scholar
  • Koller A, Schweizerisches Obligationenrecht Allgemeiner Teil (4th edn, Stämpfli 2017). google scholar
  • Kramer EA and Probst T, Obligationenrecht Allgemeiner Teil (2.th edn, Helbing Lichtenhahn 2013). google scholar
  • Kratz B, Obligationenrecht, Solidarität, Art. 143-150 OR (Berner Kommentar Kommentar zum schweizerischen Privatrecht, Stämpfli 2015). google scholar
  • Krauskopf F, Art. 143-150 OR, Die Solidarität (Zürcher Kommentar Obligationenrecht, 3rd edn, Schulthess 2016). google scholar
  • Kurt LM, Borçlunun Sorumlu Olmadığı Sonraki İmkânsızlık (TBK m 136) (Yetkin 2016). Larenz K, Lehrbuch des Schuldrechts, B. 1, Allgemeiner Teil (14th edn, C.H. Beck 1987). google scholar
  • Mazan S, ‘Art. 143-150 OR’ in Andreas Furrer and Anton K Schnyder (eds), Handkommentar zum Schweizer Privatrecht Obligationenrecht Allgemeine Bestimmungen (3rd edn. Schulthess 2016). google scholar
  • Medicus D and Lorenz S, Schuldrecht I, Allgemeiner Teil (21st edn, Beck 2015). google scholar
  • Müller T, ‘Art. 143-150 OR’ in Jolanta Kren Kostkiewicz and others (eds), OR Kommentar, Schweizerisches Obligationenrecht (3.th edn. Orell Füssli 2016). google scholar
  • Oğuzman MK and Öz MT, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler C. 1 (16th edn, Vedat Kitapçılık 2018). google scholar
  • •Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler C. 2 (14th edn, Vedat Kitapçılık 2018). google scholar
  • Olgaç S, Kazai ve İlmi İçtihatlarla Türk Borçlar Kanunu Genel Hükümler (3rd edn, İsmail Akgün Matbaası 1970). google scholar
  • Oser H and Schönenberger W, İsviçre Borçlar Kanunu Şerhi, Madde 110-183 (Şerhin İkinci Basılışının Tercümesi, Adalet Bakanlığı 1950). google scholar
  • Önen T, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler (5th edn, Yargı 1999). google scholar
  • Öz MT, ‘Borçlu Temerrüdünde Sözleşmeden Dönmenin Bu Sözleşme Gereğince Kazanılmış Ayni Haklara Etkisi ve Klasik Dönme Kuramı ile Yeni Dönme Kuramının Kısa Bir Karşılaştırmalı Eleştirisi’ [13] MHAD 131. google scholar
  • Paksoy MS, Zamanaşımından Feragat (TBK 160) (1st edn, On İki Levha 2012). google scholar
  • Pekmez C, Borcun İfa Edilmediği Defi (Ödemezlik Defi) (On İki Levha 2019). google scholar
  • Reisoğlu S, Türk Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler (25th edn, Beta 2014). google scholar
  • Saymen FH and Elbir HK, Türk Borçlar Hukuku I, Umumi Hükümler C. 2 (İsmail Akgün Matbaası 1958). google scholar
  • Schwenzer I, Schweizerisches Obligationenrecht Allgemeiner Teil (7th edn, Stämpfli 2016). google scholar
  • Seliçi Ö, Borçlar Kanununa Göre Sözleşmeden Doğan Sürekli Borç İlişkilerinin Sona Ermesi (İÜHF Yayınları 1976). google scholar
  • Serozan R, Sözleşmeden Dönme (2nd edn, Vedat Kitapçılık 2007). google scholar
  • Şahin Caner A, Türk Borçlar Kanununda Müteselsil Borçluluk (On İki Levha 2017). google scholar
  • Şener OH, Teorik ve Uygulamalı Ortaklıklar Hukuku (3rd edn, Seçkin 2017). google scholar
  • Taşkın ZD, ‘İfasına Başlanmış Sürekli Edimli Sözleşmelerde Borçlu Temerrüdü’ [2018] Galatasaray Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 429. google scholar
  • Tekinay SS, Borçlular Arasında Akdi Teselsül, (Yayımlanmamış Doçentlik Tezi) (1956). google scholar
  • • ‘Müteselsil Borç ile Kefalet Arasında Bir Mukayese’ (1956) 47(7) Adalet Dergisi 742. google scholar
  • Tekinay SS and others, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler (7th edn, Filiz Kitabevi 1993). google scholar
  • Tercier P, Pichonnaz P and Develioğlu HM, Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler (On İki Levha 2016). google scholar
  • Tuhr A von and Escher A, Allgemeiner Teil des Schweizerischen Obligationenrechts, B. II. (3rd edn, Schulthess 1984). google scholar
  • Tunçomağ K, Türk Borçlar Hukuku Genel Hükümler, C. 1 (Sermet Matbaası 1976). google scholar
  • Turan Başara G, ‘Türk Borçlar Kanunuyla Getirilen Yeni Bir Müessese: Borca Katılma’ (2014) 63(2) AÜHFD 419. google scholar
  • Velidedeoğlu HV and Özdemir R, Türk Borçlar Kanunu Şerhi (Genel-Özel) (Yargıtay Yayınları 1987). google scholar
  • Weiss A, Solidarität nach Art. 143-149 des Schweizerischen Obligationenrechts unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Verjährung (Schulthess 2011). google scholar
  • Yavuz C, Acar F and Özen B, Türk Borçlar Hukuku Özel Hükümler (10th edn, Beta 2014). google scholar
  • Yüce MB, Alacaklı ve Borçlu Açısından İfa Zamanı (Vedat Kitapçılık 2015). google scholar

Citations

Copy and paste a formatted citation or use one of the options to export in your chosen format


EXPORT



APA

Armağan, D. (2019). Debtor’s Default in Joint Indebtedness which Occurs within A Contractual Framework. Istanbul Law Review, 77(2), 617-667. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006


AMA

Armağan D. Debtor’s Default in Joint Indebtedness which Occurs within A Contractual Framework. Istanbul Law Review. 2019;77(2):617-667. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006


ABNT

Armağan, D. Debtor’s Default in Joint Indebtedness which Occurs within A Contractual Framework. Istanbul Law Review, [Publisher Location], v. 77, n. 2, p. 617-667, 2019.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Armağan, Davut,. 2019. “Debtor’s Default in Joint Indebtedness which Occurs within A Contractual Framework.” Istanbul Law Review 77, no. 2: 617-667. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006


Chicago: Humanities Style

Armağan, Davut,. “Debtor’s Default in Joint Indebtedness which Occurs within A Contractual Framework.” Istanbul Law Review 77, no. 2 (May. 2024): 617-667. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006


Harvard: Australian Style

Armağan, D 2019, 'Debtor’s Default in Joint Indebtedness which Occurs within A Contractual Framework', Istanbul Law Review, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 617-667, viewed 17 May. 2024, https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Armağan, D. (2019) ‘Debtor’s Default in Joint Indebtedness which Occurs within A Contractual Framework’, Istanbul Law Review, 77(2), pp. 617-667. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006 (17 May. 2024).


MLA

Armağan, Davut,. “Debtor’s Default in Joint Indebtedness which Occurs within A Contractual Framework.” Istanbul Law Review, vol. 77, no. 2, 2019, pp. 617-667. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006


Vancouver

Armağan D. Debtor’s Default in Joint Indebtedness which Occurs within A Contractual Framework. Istanbul Law Review [Internet]. 17 May. 2024 [cited 17 May. 2024];77(2):617-667. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006 doi: 10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006


ISNAD

Armağan, Davut. “Debtor’s Default in Joint Indebtedness which Occurs within A Contractual Framework”. Istanbul Law Review 77/2 (May. 2024): 617-667. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0006



TIMELINE


Submitted06.09.2019
Last Revision25.12.2019
Accepted26.12.2019

LICENCE


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


SHARE




Istanbul University Press aims to contribute to the dissemination of ever growing scientific knowledge through publication of high quality scientific journals and books in accordance with the international publishing standards and ethics. Istanbul University Press follows an open access, non-commercial, scholarly publishing.