Lex Commissoria yasağının bertaraf edilerek kredi ihtiyacının sağlanması amacıyla geri alım sözleşmesi kullanılabilmektedir. Zira Lex Commissoria yasağı, rehinle teminat altına alınmış bir borcun ifasının gerçekleşmemesi halinde, rehin konusu şeyin mülkiyetinin alacaklıya geçeceği yönünde anlaşma yapılamayacağını öngörmektedir. Geri alım sözleşmesinin teminat olarak kullanılması durumunda ise, taşınmazın mülkiyeti devralana geçmekte ve borç ifa edilince devralan devredene geri verme yükümlülüğü altına girmektedir. Yani burada daha sözleşmenin başında taşınmazın mülkiyeti karşı âkide geçmektedir ve taraflar arasında bir inanç sözleşmesi vardır. Bu şekilde tesis edilen geri alım hakkında borçlu borcunu ifa edemezse alacaklının, teminat için temlik edilen şeyi “ifa uğruna edim” olarak kendisinde saklı tutması lex commissoria yasağına aykırı değildir.
The Lex Commissoria prohibition can be abolished and a recovery agreement can be used to satisfy the need for credit. The Zira Lex Commissoria prohibition stipulates that, if a debt declaration under the guarantee of the kidnapping does not occur, there will be no agreement that the property of the subject of the kidnapping will be transferred to the recipient. If the recovery contract is used as a guarantee, the property of the non-mobile is transferred and the debt is fulfilled under the obligation to return to the transferred. Therefore, there is an agreement between the parties, and there is an agreement between the parties, and there is an agreement between the parties. If the debtor cannot fulfill his debt on the recovery established in this way, the recipient must keep what is provided for the guarantee in him as "I do for the benefit" is not contrary to the prohibition of lex commissoria.
Lex commissoria ban stipulates that if a debt secured by a pledge does not mate-rialize, the property of the pledge (subject) will be transferred to the creditor. If the repurchase agreement is used as a guarantee, the ownership of the immovable passes to the assignee and when the obligation is discharged, the assignee is under a liability to return it to alienator. In other words, the ownership of the im-movable is against the contract at the beginning of it and there is a fiduciary agre-ement between the parties. If the obligator fails to fulfill his debt about the repurc-hase which is established in this way, the payee’s reservation of what is assigned in terms of guarantee as "possession to perform-" is not against the lex commis-soria ban.
Alan : Hukuk
Dergi Türü : Ulusal
Benzer Makaleler | Yazar | # |
---|
Makale | Yazar | # |
---|