According to
Art.312 of Turkish Code of Obligations, parties to a lease may agree to have it
annotated in the land register. After articles 310 and 311 of Turkish Code of
Obligations, regulating mandatory legal assignment of the lease contract, came
into effect in 2012, this annotation lost its significance. In spite of this development, it is claimed
that this annotation has still some value. According to some writers and
expressionary statement of the code, this annotation will eliminate termination
right of the owner due to own needs, recontruction or redevelopment based on
Art.350 and termination right of the new owner due to own need based on
Art.351. Actually, annotation enables the tenant to claim his existing
contractual rights against anyone who obtains ownership or any other real right
affecting his usage after the annotation. That is why it is logical to claim
that annotation eliminates the termination right of the new owner due to own
need because this right did not exist in the registered lease agreement.
Contrary to this, annotation should not remove the termination right
of the first lessor who asked for the annotation because according to Art.
1009, annotation does not change the contractual rights and obligations among
the existing parties of a contract. Accordingly, new owner may enjoy the same
contractual rights even if the relevant contract has been annotated since the
contract is assigned to him in accordance with Art.310.
Kira sözleşmesinin şerhi nispi hakların şerhinin etkisi malikin gereksinimi yeniden inşa ve imar nedeni ile fesih hakkı yeni malikin gereksinimi
Primary Language | Turkish |
---|---|
Subjects | Law in Context |
Journal Section | Articles |
Authors | |
Publication Date | June 30, 2019 |
Submission Date | March 13, 2019 |
Acceptance Date | May 20, 2019 |
Published in Issue | Year 2019 Volume: 10 Issue: 1 |