The Prohibition on Changing of the Prescription Periods in Turkish, Swiss and German Law

Harun Mirsad Günday

Makale detayları

The Prohibition on Changing of the Prescription Periods in Turkish, Swiss and German Law

Yazarlar:

Harun Mirsad Günday

Yayıncı:

Sakarya University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi:

Sakarya Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.13 Issue 1, pp.350-386

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2025

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001340588

pISSN:

2147-768X

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 In debt relationships, parties can make arrangements regarding prescription periods in accordance with the principle of freedom of contract. Indeed, the freedom of the parties to determine the content of the contract also includes the freedom to determine the prescription periods applicable to the rights arising from the contractual relationship. However, this freedom is not unlimited and is subject to the restrictions prescribed by law. In Turkish-Swiss law, the prohibition on changing prescription periods is regulated in the provisions of TCO Article 148 and OR Article 129, which are of a prohibitive nature. Indeed, the relevant provisions foresee an absolute prohibition regarding the prescription periods. Moreover, due to their broad scope of application, there is a situation where the periods cannot be changed as a rule and changing them is an exception. In German law, it is seen that the provision in  202 BGB, which deals with the issue, is based on the principle of freedom of contract. Indeed, the German legislator has been content with generally stating the limits of the prohibition of changing prescription periods. It has ruled that savings can be made on prescription periods, provided that these limitations are complied with. In this study, the prohibition of changing prescription periods in the Turkish-Swiss and German legal orders has been examined comparatively. While this examination was being carried out, the similarities and differences in the three legal orders were revealed. Finally, it has been attempted to contribute to Turkish law with the suggestions and criticisms provided.

 In debt relationships, parties can make arrangements regarding prescription periods in accordance with the principle of freedom of contract. Indeed, the freedom of the parties to determine the content of the contract also includes the freedom to determine the prescription periods applicable to the rights arising from the contractual relationship. However, this freedom is not unlimited and is subject to the restrictions prescribed by law. In Turkish-Swiss law, the prohibition on changing prescription periods is regulated in the provisions of TCO Article 148 and OR Article 129, which are of a prohibitive nature. Indeed, the relevant provisions foresee an absolute prohibition regarding the prescription periods. Moreover, due to their broad scope of application, there is a situation where the periods cannot be changed as a rule and changing them is an exception. In German law, it is seen that the provision in  202 BGB, which deals with the issue, is based on the principle of freedom of contract. Indeed, the German legislator has been content with generally stating the limits of the prohibition of changing prescription periods. It has ruled that savings can be made on prescription periods, provided that these limitations are complied with. In this study, the prohibition of changing prescription periods in the Turkish-Swiss and German legal orders has been examined comparatively. While this examination was being carried out, the similarities and differences in the three legal orders were revealed. Finally, it has been attempted to contribute to Turkish law with the suggestions and criticisms provided.

 In debt relationships, parties can make arrangements regarding prescription periods in accordance with the principle of freedom of contract. Indeed, the freedom of the parties to determine the content of the contract also includes the freedom to determine the prescription periods applicable to the rights arising from the contractual relationship. However, this freedom is not unlimited and is subject to the restrictions prescribed by law. In Turkish-Swiss law, the prohibition on changing prescription periods is regulated in the provisions of TCO Article 148 and OR Article 129, which are of a prohibitive nature. Indeed, the relevant provisions foresee an absolute prohibition regarding the prescription periods. Moreover, due to their broad scope of application, there is a situation where the periods cannot be changed as a rule and changing them is an exception. In German law, it is seen that the provision in  202 BGB, which deals with the issue, is based on the principle of freedom of contract. Indeed, the German legislator has been content with generally stating the limits of the prohibition of changing prescription periods. It has ruled that savings can be made on prescription periods, provided that these limitations are complied with. In this study, the prohibition of changing prescription periods in the Turkish-Swiss and German legal orders has been examined comparatively. While this examination was being carried out, the similarities and differences in the three legal orders were revealed. Finally, it has been attempted to contribute to Turkish law with the suggestions and criticisms provided.

 Borç ilişkilerinde taraflar sözleşme özgürlüğü ilkesi gereğince zamanaşımı sürelerine yönelik düzenlemeler yapabilmektedir. Nitekim taraflarca sözleşmenin içeriğini belirleme özgürlüğü sözleşme ilişkisinden doğan hakların tabi olduğu zamanaşımı sürelerini belirleme özgürlüğünü de içermektedir. Ancak bu özgürlük de sınırsız olmayıp kanunun öngördüğü sınırlamalara tabidir. Türk-İsviçre hukukunda zamanaşımı sürelerini değiştirme yasağı yasaklayıcı norm niteliğinde olan TBK md.148 ve OR Art.129 hükümlerinde düzenlenmiştir. Nitekim ilgili hükümler, zamanaşımı süreleri bakımından mutlak değiştirme yasağı öngörmektedir. Ayrıca bu hükümlerin geniş bir uygulanma alanı olması sebebiyle sürelerin değiştirilememesi kural ve değiştirilebilmesi ise istisnadır. Alman hukukunda konuyu ele alan BGB  202 hükmünde ise sözleşme özgürlüğü ilkesinden hareket edildiği görülmektedir. Gerçekten de Alman kanun koyucusu zamanaşımı sürelerini değiştirme yasağının sınırlarını genel olarak belirtmekle yetinmiştir. Bu sınırlamalara uyulması kaydıyla zamanaşımı süreleri üzerinde tasarruf edilebileceğini hükme bağlamıştır. Bu çalışmada Türk-İsviçre ve Alman hukuk düzenlerinde zamanaşımı sürelerini değiştirme yasağı karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmiştir. Bu inceleme yapılırken de üç hukuk düzeninde yer alan benzerlikler ve farklılıklar ortaya konulmuştur. En nihayetinde yer verilen öneri ve eleştiriler ile birlikte Türk hukukuna katkı sağlanmaya çalışılmıştır.

Makale detayları

The Prohibition on Changing of the Prescription Periods in Turkish, Swiss and German Law

Yazarlar:

Harun Mirsad Günday

Yayıncı:

Sakarya University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi:

Sakarya Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.13 Issue 1, pp.350-386

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2025

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001340588

pISSN:

2147-768X

Prescription

Right to Claim

Limitation Period

Debt Relationship

Freedom of ContractZamanaşımı

Alacak Hakkı

Hak Düşürücü Süre

Borç İlişkisi

Sözleşme Özgürlüğü

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Harun Mirsad Günday

Yayıncı: Sakarya University

Ana Başlıklar: Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi: Sakarya Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.13 Issue 1, pp.350-386

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 10/2025

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001340588

pISSN: 2147-768X

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Harun Mirsad Günday

Yayıncı:

Sakarya University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi:

Sakarya Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.13 Issue 1, pp.350-386

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2025

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001340588

pISSN:

2147-768X