Tereke Borçlarından Sorumluluk Kapsamında Rehinli Tereke Malının Mirasçıya Bırakılması
Cemile Turgut, Dilşah Büşra KartalKişinin ölümünden sonraki özel hukuk ilişkilerini düzenleyen miras hukuku, mirasbırakanın ve mirasçıların menfaati yanında alacaklıların menfaatini de korumaktadır. Bu alacaklılardan bir kısmı ise mirasbırakanın alacaklılarıdır. Mirasçılar, mirasbırakanın terekesindeki borçlardan tüm kişisel malvarlıklarıyla ve diğer mirasçılarla müteselsilen sorumludurlar (TMK m 599, 641-ZGB Art 560, 603). Miras ortaklığının giderilmesi kural olarak bu sorumluluğu kendiliğinden ortadan kaldırmaz (TMK m 681, ZGB Art 639). Ancak tereke borçlarının bölünmesine veya üstlenilmesine alacaklı tarafından rıza gösterilmesi mümkündür. Alacaklının bölünmesine veya üstlenilmesine razı olduğu tereke borçlarına ilişkin olarak diğer mirasçıların müteselsil sorumluluğu sona erer. Mirasbırakanın üçüncü kişilere karşı borçları için üzerinde rehin tesis edilmiş bir tereke malının paylaşılması halinde ise kanun koyucu TMK m 655’te (ZGB Art 615) özel bir hüküm öngörmüştür. Hükme göre “Paylaşmada kendisine mirasbırakanın borçları için rehnedilmiş bir tereke malı düşen mirasçı, o malın güvence altına aldığı borcu üstlenmiş olur.” Ancak hükümden ne anlaşılması gerektiği, mirasbırakanın alacaklısına karşı kimin, ne şekilde sorumlu olacağı, alacaklının rızasının aranıp aranmayacağı açık değildir. Çalışmada bahsi geçen hüküm incelenecek olup paylaşmada kendisine rehnedilmiş tereke malı düşen mirasçının sorumluluğunun şartları, kapsamı ve sonuçlarına yer verilecektir.
Transfer of Pledged Estate Property to the Heir within the Liability for Inheritance Debt Framework
Cemile Turgut, Dilşah Büşra KartalInheritance law, which regulates private law relations after the death of an individual, protects the interests of creditors, the deceased, and heirs. Some of these creditors are the creditors of the deceased. Joint and several heirs’ liability for debts of the estate is regulated in the CC (CC Art. 599, 641-ZGB Art. 560, 603). As a rule, this liability does not disappear with the dissolution of the community of heirs per se (Art. 681 CC, Art. 639 ZGB). On the other hand, a creditor may give consent to the division or assumption of the debt of the property. In this scenario, the joint and several liabilities of the heirs against the creditor shall cease. In the case of the division of an estate property pledged for the debts of the deceased, the legislator has provided a special provision in Article 655 of the CC (ZGB Art 615). According to this provision, “The heir who inherits an estate property pledged for the debts of the deceased shall assume the debt secured by that property.” However, this provision is not clear in meaning and does not directly regulate who is liable to the deceased’s creditor and does not specify how and whether the consent of the creditor will be sought. In this study, the aforementioned provision is analysed, and the conditions, scope and consequences of the liability of the heir who receives pledged property in the partition are discussed.
In Turkish inheritance law, heirs obtain the entire estate as a whole upon testator’s death. This classical understanding, which is rooted in Roman and Pandect law, is also acknowledged in the Turkish-Swiss legal system as well (Art 599 of the Turkish Civil Code; Art 560 of the Swiss Civil Code).
When multiple heirs exist, they form a community of heirs. In this case, the heir jointly bears the rights and assets of the inheritance. For this reason, they must make a unanimous decision on all disposals of the probate property. They are also under joint and several liability for the debt of the estate. Joint ownership of the estate continues until division. However, joint and several liabilities for debts do not cease with the division of the property. As a rule, in order for the division or assumption of the debts of the estate among the heirs to be effective against creditors, the heirs must consent to an agreement between them (Art 681 of the Turkish Civil Code).
Art. 655 of the Turkish Civil Code regulates this special provision. According to Art. 655, “The heir who inherits an estate property pledged for the debts of the deceased shall assume the debt secured by that property.” There is a dispute concerning whether this provision establishes an exception to Article 681. The debate centres on whether the consent of the creditor is required for the assumption of debt or whether a mere transfer of the property that is pledged to the heir is sufficient.
The first requirement for the application of Art. 655 of the Turkish Civil Code is the establishment of a pledge on the deceased’s own property. The scope of the provision includes pledges concerning movable and immovable property. The second condition is that the pledge must be established for the deceased’s debt. Although a pledge is generally granted by the debtor of the receivable it secures, it may also be granted by another person to the debt of another person. If the deceased has established a pledge for the debt of a third party, Art. 655 shall not be applicable and the heir to whom the pledged property is assigned shall not have assumed the original debt. Under these circumstances, the heir only has to bear the risk that if the debt is not fulfilled, the property will be sold and the receivable will be collected. The last requirement for the application of the provision is that the pledged property is left to the heir. This is done through division of inheritance. The heirs may conclude a written sharing agreement (Art 676 of the Turkish Civil Code), or if they cannot agree, a partition lawsuit is filed (Art 642 of the Turkish Civil Code).
When interpreting Article 655, Article 888 of the Turkish Civil Code should be taken into account where the pledge concerned an immovable property. Accordingly, in the event that the immovable property on which the mortgage is established is left to one or more of the heirs in the division of inheritance, the creditor must notify the land registry officer in writing that he reserves the right to apply to the other heirs within one year following the notification of this circumstance to him. Otherwise, the debt is assumed by the heirs to whom the property was left. Thus, other heirs are released from liability.
The basic principles of inheritance law should be considered when assigning other pledged probate assets. For the protection of the creditors of the deceased, the legislator has provided a double guarantee by allowing recourse to both the estate of the deceased and heirs’ personal assets. The joint and several liabilities of the heirs against the creditors end upon the approval of the creditors to the agreements regarding the debt’s assumption by one of the heirs or upon the expiration of the 5-year period stipulated in the law. All of these regulations are primarily intended to protect the creditors of the deceased. There is a risk that the pledged creditor may be harmed by leaving the pledged probate property to an heir that is financially unstable. As a result, it should be accepted that the provision regulates only the internal relations of the heirs and cannot be asserted against creditors without their consent.
