Özet:

Following the termination of the agency contract, one of the most important rights of the agency is the equalization claim. In TCC article 122, conditions of the agency for qualifying for equalization claim are laid. Accordingly, while client is able to acquire important benefits after the end of the contractual relationship thanks to new customers found by the agency, agency loses the right to charge as a result of the termination of the contract relationship, thus, the equivalence payment must fall in accordance with equity. In addition to these positive conditions, negative conditions are also provided. Accordingly, if the agency has terminated the contract without the right to justify the termination or the client has terminated the contract due to the fault of the agency, the agency shall not be able to ask for equalization. The condition foreseen in TCC article 122.3 that agency terminating contract “without an action justifying client’s termination” shall not be able to claim equalization is a regulation that embodies the equity condition stipulated in TCC article 122.1 subparagraph 3. Therefore, it should not be concluded that justifying reason for agency’s termination of contract is limited with “client’s action for justifying the termination”. That is because, despite not originated from client’s own actions, in cases based on client’s field of authority, even where it is not possible for agency to adhere to contract by the honesty rule, equity may require protection of the equalization claim by client terminating contract. Therefore, it is necessary to interpret the expression of “client’s action to justify the termination” which is the condition required to protect equalization claim of the agency terminating contract. In this study,  it was examined in which conditions the agency terminating contract could qualify for the equivalence of contract by giving examples of judicial decisions.

Anahtar Kelimeler: