Kira Sözleşmesine Koyulan Önalım Hakkına İlişkin Kayıtların Sözleşmenin Sona Ermesi Halinde Akıbet
Önalım hakkı, önalım olgusu gerçekleştiğinde hak sahibine, hakkın konusu üzerinde mülkiyet hakkı kazanma olanağı tanıyan bir yenilik doğuran haktır. Önalım hakkı kanundan ya da sözleşmeden doğabilir. Sözleşmeden doğan önalım hakkı Türk Medeni Kanunu ve Türk Borçlar Kanunu’nda ele alınmıştır. Sözleşmeden doğan önalım hakkı ya doğrudan doğruya önalım sözleşmesinden doğar ya da kira sözleşmesi gibi başka bir sözleşmeye eklenen bir sözleşme kaydına bağlı olarak ortaya çıkar. Son yıllarda mahkeme içtihatlarında anılan bu ikinci şeklin örneklerine rastlanmaktadır. Kanun koyucu önalım sözleşmesinde geçerlilik şekli olarak adi yazılı şekli yeterli görmüştür. Esas itibarla önalım sözleşmesinin şekil yönünden alım ve gerialım sözleşmelerinden ayrılarak görece daha kolay bir şekilde yapılabilmesinin temel sebebi de mehaz uygulamada sıklıkla karşılaşılan kira sözleşmelerine önalım kayıtlarının eklenmesi halidir. Kira sözleşmesi yapıldığı sırada sözleşmeye koyulan bir kayıtla kiracı lehine meydana gelen önalım hakkı bir yandan kiracının gelecekte kira konusunun mülkiyetini kazanabilmesine kapı aralamakta, öte yandan kiracının, kira konusu üzerinde istemediği kişilerin mülkiyet hakkı kazanmasına engel olma imkânı tanımaktadır. Bu yönüyle kiracıya önalım hakkı tanımanın önemli pratik sonuçları bulunmaktadır. Kira sözleşmesinde önalım kaydına yer verilmesiyle birlikte, kanun koyucunun bağımsız hüküm ve sonuç bağladığı bir kurum, kira sözleşmesiyle iç içe geçmektedir. Bunun sonucu olarak bilhassa önalım hakkının hüküm ve sonuçlarını kira sözleşmesini de nazara alarak tayin etmek gerekmektedir. Çalışma bu konuyu ele almaktadır. Bu bağlamda önalım hakkının kira sözleşmesine bağlı olup olmadığı, önalım hakkının süresinin nasıl belirleneceği, kira sözleşmesinin sona ermesi halinde önalım hakkının akıbetinin ne olacağı incelenmektedir.
Consequences of Pre-emption Clauses in Lease Agreements When the Contract Ends
The right of preemption can arise from legal provisions or contractual agreements. The right of preemption arising from a contract is addressed in Turkish Civil Code and Turkish Code of Obligations. These rights may either derive directly from a pre-emption agreement or result from a contractual clause added to another agreement, such as a lease contract. It is noteworthy that examples of the latter form have been cited in the recent jurisprudence. The main reason why pre emption agreements differ in form from purchase and repurchase agreements is that pre-emption clauses are frequently included in lease contracts in practical applications.
The clause granting the lessee a right of pre-emption included in the lease agreement serves a dual purpose. On the one hand, it allows the lessee to potentially acquire ownership of the leased property in the future. On the other hand, it provides the lessee with the ability to prevent unwanted third parties from gaining ownership rights over the subject property. Consequently, granting the lessee a right of pre-emption has significant practical implications.
The insertion of a pre-emption clause into a lease contract merges a regulation with independent implications into the agreement. This requires identifying the consequences and effects of the right of preemption, particularly in relation to lease agreements. This study tackled this problem. Specifically, the analysis encompasses whether the right of pre-emption is contingent on the lease contract, how the length of the right of pre-emption is established, and what occurs to the right of pre-emption upon the expiration of the lease agreement.
The right of preemption grants the right holder the opportunity to acquire ownership over the object of the right once the pre-emption event occurs. The right of preemption can arise from law or contractual agreements. When it arises from a contract, it can be established through an independent pre-emption agreement or by adding a clause to another contract, such as a lease agreement. From the perspective of Turkish law, in Swiss law, which serves as a reference, the legislator has facilitated the formation of pre-emption agreements by considering ordinary written forms to be sufficient, especially when such agreements frequently arise from clauses added to lease contracts. In terms of Turkish law, it has been argued that simplifying the form of pre-emption agreements is meaningless compared to purchase and repurchase agreements. In Turkish legal practice, the addition of pre-emption clauses to lease agreements has been rare. Nevertheless, recent jurisprudential developments have indicated that pre-emption clauses are gradually being included in lease contracts in the UAE. Such practices create a favourable legal situation for lessees who hope to eventually acquire ownership of their rented property or business premises. Therefore, the right of preemption is of paramount importance in lease agreements.
From the perspective of Turkish law, not narrow and technical principal-accesory relationship between the right of preemption and a lease agreement. However, beyond this, there exists a functional connection between the origin of the right of preemption and the establishment of a lease agreement. From this perspective, it can be said that there is a broad linkage between the right of preemption and the lease agreement. In this broad sense, the right of preemption becomes subject to the fate of the lease agreement upon acceptance of this connection. Thus, the termination of a lease agreement of any form also terminates the right of preemption. However, if the conditions necessary for the exercise of the pre-emption right are fulfilled, the termination of the lease agreement no longer extinguishes the pre-emption right.
The right of preemption can be established for a maximum period of 10 years. Parties may agree to participate for a shorter period. However, if the parties do not specify a time frame, the right of preemption is deemed to have been established for 10 years. In contrast, a lease agreement can be for either fixed or indefinite terms. In both cases, in residential and roofed workplace leases, the contract can be terminated by the lessee in the first instance, and the lessor has this right only after a one-year extension period at the end of 10 years. Therefore, if the lessee does not terminate the lease agreement, the lease agreement will continue for more than 10 years. In this situation, despite the lease agreement continuing beyond 10 years, the right of pre emption will cease due to the mandatory provision limiting its duration to 10 years. In terms of the de lege ferenda, it is more appropriate to accept that the pre-emption right exists as long as the lease agreement continues to exist.
The right of preemption as a rule creates legal effects only between the lessee and the lessor. For a lessee to assert his/her right of pre-emption against third parties, the claim must be annotated in the land registry. However, the annotation of the lease agreement in the land registry does not automatically imply an annotation of the right of pre-emption. To annotate the right of pre-emption, the parties must either draw up an annotation agreement or include a related term in the lease agreement. Once the right of pre-emption has been annotated, it can be asserted against third parties who purchase the leased property during the continuation of the lease agreement. However, when the lease agreement terminates, the right of pre-emption also ceases. In this case, annotation naturally loses its effectiveness.
In Turkish legislation, the right of pre-emption is regulated by considering independent pre-emption agreements. However, when pre-emption clauses are included in lease agreements or other term-based contracts, legal provisions can sometimes lead to inaccurate results. To solve these problems, which clearly arise in terms of the duration of the pre-emption right, legal regulations can be made in favour of the lessee to grant a legal pre-emption right depending on the establishment of the lease agreement. This approach aligns with the general tendency of law to protect lessees. It has been observed that some legal systems in other countries also recognise legal pre-emption rights in favour of lessees.
