Evaluation of the Consequences of Official Bookkeeping in Relation to the Law of Enforcement

Murat Bildir

Makale detayları

Evaluation of the Consequences of Official Bookkeeping in Relation to the Law of Enforcement

Yazarlar:

Murat Bildir

Yayıncı:

Necmettin Erbakan University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi:

Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.6 Issue 2, pp.826-850

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001296101

pISSN:

2667-4076

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 The change, development and complexity of economic, social and cultural relations make it difficult for the heirs, who are officially close to the testators, to know the assets of the testator. Accepting or rejecting an inheritance whose content is unknown may also jeopardize the heirs own assets. In order to eliminate this drawback and to ensure that the choice of accepting or rejecting the inheritance can be used safely, the institution of official bookkeeping has been established. In order for the official bookkeeping institution to achieve its purpose, the assets of the testator must be protected against legal transactions and execution proceedings. The legislator has taken some measures to ensure that the assets of the testator do not change as much as possible. According to Article 625 of the TCC, which is one of these measures, execution proceedings cannot be initiated during the official bookkeeping period. The second provision that can be applied during the official bookkeeping period is Article 53 of the EBL. Accordingly, the execution shall be suspended during the periods in the TCC regarding acceptance and rejection. The first provision is an explicit provision that is directly applicable during the official bookkeeping period. The second provision, on the other hand, does not mention a direct consequence of the official bookkeeping process; it only makes a general reference to the periods during which the proceedings will be suspended. Since the heirs are given the right to choose between acceptance and rejection at the end of the official bookkeeping process, it is conceivable that the second provision may also be applied during the official bookkeeping process. In this case, it is necessary to address the relationship between these two provisions that have consequences regarding the law of enforcement. The decisions of the Supreme Court mostly include both provisions, but do not reveal the relationship between them. The doctrine is relatively richer in this regard. Our study aims to evaluate the relationship between these provisions after addressing both provisions separately.

 The change, development and complexity of economic, social and cultural relations make it difficult for the heirs, who are officially close to the testators, to know the assets of the testator. Accepting or rejecting an inheritance whose content is unknown may also jeopardize the heirs own assets. In order to eliminate this drawback and to ensure that the choice of accepting or rejecting the inheritance can be used safely, the institution of official bookkeeping has been established. In order for the official bookkeeping institution to achieve its purpose, the assets of the testator must be protected against legal transactions and execution proceedings. The legislator has taken some measures to ensure that the assets of the testator do not change as much as possible. According to Article 625 of the TCC, which is one of these measures, execution proceedings cannot be initiated during the official bookkeeping period. The second provision that can be applied during the official bookkeeping period is Article 53 of the EBL. Accordingly, the execution shall be suspended during the periods in the TCC regarding acceptance and rejection. The first provision is an explicit provision that is directly applicable during the official bookkeeping period. The second provision, on the other hand, does not mention a direct consequence of the official bookkeeping process; it only makes a general reference to the periods during which the proceedings will be suspended. Since the heirs are given the right to choose between acceptance and rejection at the end of the official bookkeeping process, it is conceivable that the second provision may also be applied during the official bookkeeping process. In this case, it is necessary to address the relationship between these two provisions that have consequences regarding the law of enforcement. The decisions of the Supreme Court mostly include both provisions, but do not reveal the relationship between them. The doctrine is relatively richer in this regard. Our study aims to evaluate the relationship between these provisions after addressing both provisions separately.

 The change, development and complexity of economic, social and cultural relations make it difficult for the heirs, who are officially close to the testators, to know the assets of the testator. Accepting or rejecting an inheritance whose content is unknown may also jeopardize the heirs own assets. In order to eliminate this drawback and to ensure that the choice of accepting or rejecting the inheritance can be used safely, the institution of official bookkeeping has been established. In order for the official bookkeeping institution to achieve its purpose, the assets of the testator must be protected against legal transactions and execution proceedings. The legislator has taken some measures to ensure that the assets of the testator do not change as much as possible. According to Article 625 of the TCC, which is one of these measures, execution proceedings cannot be initiated during the official bookkeeping period. The second provision that can be applied during the official bookkeeping period is Article 53 of the EBL. Accordingly, the execution shall be suspended during the periods in the TCC regarding acceptance and rejection. The first provision is an explicit provision that is directly applicable during the official bookkeeping period. The second provision, on the other hand, does not mention a direct consequence of the official bookkeeping process; it only makes a general reference to the periods during which the proceedings will be suspended. Since the heirs are given the right to choose between acceptance and rejection at the end of the official bookkeeping process, it is conceivable that the second provision may also be applied during the official bookkeeping process. In this case, it is necessary to address the relationship between these two provisions that have consequences regarding the law of enforcement. The decisions of the Supreme Court mostly include both provisions, but do not reveal the relationship between them. The doctrine is relatively richer in this regard. Our study aims to evaluate the relationship between these provisions after addressing both provisions separately.

 Ekonomik, sosyal, kültürel ilişkilerin değişmesi, gelişmesi ve karmaşıklaşması; mirasbırakanların malvarlıklarının, onlara resmî olarak yakın kişiler olan mirasçılar tarafından bilinmesini zorlaştırmaktadır. İçeriği bilinmeyen bir mirası kabul veya reddetmek, mirasçıların kendi malvarlığını da tehlikeye atabilir. İşte bu sakıncanın ortadan kaldırılması ve mirasın reddi veya kabulü yönündeki tercihin güvenle kullanılabilmesi için resmî defter tutma kurumu ihdas edilmiştir. Resmî defter tutma kurumunun amacına ulaşabilmesi için mirasbırakanın malvarlığının hukukî işlemlere ve takiplere karşı korunması gerekir. Kanun koyucu, mirasbırakanın malvarlığının mümkün olduğunca değişikliğe uğramaması için bazı tedbirler almıştır. TMK m. 625e göre, resmî defter tutma süresince takip yapılamaz. Resmî defter tutma süresi boyunca uygulanabilecek ikinci hüküm ise İİK m. 53tür. Buna göre, kabul ve redde ilişkin TMKdaki süreler boyunca takip geri kalır. İlk hüküm resmî defter tutma süresince doğrudan uygulanabilir nitelikte olan açık bir hükümdür. İkinci hükümde ise resmî defter tutma sürecine ilişkin doğrudan bir sonuçtan bahsedilmemekte; yalnızca takibin tâlik edileceği sürelere ilişkin genel bir yollama yapılmaktadır. Resmî defter tutma sürecinin sonunda da mirasçılara, kabul ve red hususunda bir seçimlik hak tanındığından, ikinci hükmün de resmî defter tutma sürecinde uygulama alanı bulması düşünülebilir. Bu durumda takip hukukuna ilişkin sonuç doğuran bu iki hükmün ilişkisinin ele alınması gerekir. Yargıtay kararlarında çoğunlukla her iki hükme de yer verilmekte ancak bunlar arasındaki ilişki ortaya konulmamaktadır. Öğreti, bu konuda nispeten daha zengindir. Çalışmamız, iki hükmü de ayrı ayrı ele aldıktan sonra bu hükümler arasındaki ilişkiyi irdelemeye çalışmaktadır.

Makale detayları

Evaluation of the Consequences of Official Bookkeeping in Relation to the Law of Enforcement

Yazarlar:

Murat Bildir

Yayıncı:

Necmettin Erbakan University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi:

Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.6 Issue 2, pp.826-850

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001296101

pISSN:

2667-4076

Official bookkeeping

postponement states

testator

heir

prohibition of execution proceeding.Resmî defter tutma

talik hâli

mirasbırakan

mirasçı

takip yasağı

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Murat Bildir

Yayıncı: Necmettin Erbakan University

Ana Başlıklar: Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi: Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.6 Issue 2, pp.826-850

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 12/2023

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001296101

pISSN: 2667-4076

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Murat Bildir

Yayıncı:

Necmettin Erbakan University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hukuk (Diğer)

Dergi:

Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.6 Issue 2, pp.826-850

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001296101

pISSN:

2667-4076