Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Published in:
Formation of the Contract Read chapter Read first chapter

2017 | Supplement | Chapter

24. Effects of the Obligation on Third Parties

Author : İlhan Helvacı

Published in: Turkish Contract Law

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

An obligational relationship is a legal bond (vinculum iuris) solely between a debtor and a creditor. Thus, as a general rule, an obligational relationship may not give rights to third parties. This principle is referred to as privity of the obligational relationship.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
previous chapter Default of the Debtor
next chapter Extinguishment of Obligations
Footnotes
1
Antalya (2012), p. 138; Aybay (2011), pp. 10–12, 149–151; Becker (1941), art. 110–113; Berger (2012), pp. 25, 802–811, 826–836; Engel (1997), pp. 10, 417–436, 613–615; Eren (2015), pp. 52–56, 1141–1160; Feyzioğlu (1976), pp. 22–23; Feyzioğlu (1977), pp. 267–291; Gauch et al. (2008), pp. 324–339; Honsell et al. (2003), art. 110–113; Kocayusufpaşaoğlu (2014), pp. 15–26; Kılıçoğlu (2013), pp. 564–587; Nomer (2015), pp. 14–24, 411–417; Oser and Schönenberger (1929), Vorbemerkungen zum dritten Abschnitt (art. 110–113), art. 110–113; Oğuzman and Öz (2015), pp. 21–23, 27–29; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), pp. 411–458; Reisoğlu (2014), pp. 34–36, 394–402; Schwenzer (2009), pp. 22–25, 535–546; Serozan (2014), pp. 28–31; Tekinay et al. (1993), pp. 60, 208–239; Tercier (2004), pp. 188–191, 245–246; Tercier et al. (2016), pp. 42–44, 328–332, 426–427; Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 110–113, and von Tuhr and Escher (1974), pp. 28–32, 236–254.
 
2
von Tuhr and Peter (1979), § 2, p. 9; Engel (1997), p. 10; Kocayusufpaşaoğlu (2014), p. 18.
 
3
Tercier (2004), p. 38; Tercier et al. (2016), p. 43; Oğuzman and Öz (2015), p. 21.
 
4
Kocayusufpaşaoğlu (2014), p. 16; Feyzioğlu (1976), p. 23; Oğuzman and Öz (2015), p. 21; Eren (2015), p. 54.
 
5
Oser and Schönenberger (1929), art. 41, N. 99; Kocayusufpaşaoğlu (2014), p. 17; Oğuzman and Öz (2015), p. 21; Nomer (2015), p. 15; Eren (2015), p. 55. For further explanations see Kapancı (2016).
 
6
Oğuzman and Öz (2015), pp. 21–22.
 
7
Oğuzman and Öz (2015), pp. 21–22.
 
8
For further explanations see Reisoğlu (1958).
 
9
Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 55, N. 17 ff; Engel (1997), pp. 537–538.
 
10
For further explanations see Sungurbey (1963), Gümüş (2003).
 
11
Steinauer (2007), p. 280; Oğuzman et al. (2016), pp. 249–251; Nomer and Ergüne (2016), pp. 131–137; Oğuzman and Öz (2015), pp. 27–29.
 
12
For further explanations see Oğuzman et al. (2016), pp. 213–216; Nomer and Ergüne (2016), pp. 129–130.
 
13
For further explanations see Karabağ Bulut (2009).
 
14
Eren (2015), p. 1152; Kocayusufpaşaoğlu (2014), pp. 20–21.
 
15
Oğuzman and Öz (2015), p. 39; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), pp. 443–445. For further explanations Kocayusufpaşaoğlu (2014), pp. 20–25.
 
16
Serozan (2014), pp. 246–247; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), pp. 443–445; Eren (2015), p. 1058.
 
17
See Sect. 24.4, Chaps. 32 and 33.
 
18
For further explanations see Kılıçoğlu (1979).
 
19
Becker (1941), art. 68, N. 4; Oğuzman and Öz (2015), p. 251.
 
20
Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 110, N. 1; Engel (1997), p. 613.
 
21
Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 110, N. 14; Oğuzman and Öz (2015), pp. 262–263; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 209; Serozan (2014), p. 28.
 
22
Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 110, N. 23; Oğuzman and Öz (2015), p. 263; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 210.
 
23
Engel (1997), p. 614; Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 110, N. 31; Oğuzman and Öz (2015), p. 263; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 211; Reisoğlu (2014), p. 297; Eren (2015), p. 932.
 
24
von Tuhr and Escher (1974), § 59, III, p. 28; Oğuzman and Öz (2015), p. 263; Serozan (2014), p. 28; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 214 ff.
 
25
See Sect. 27.​5.​2.
 
26
Porte-fort, Vertrag zu Lasten eines Dritten.
 
27
For further explanations see Tandoğan (1959), Reisoğlu (1963), Yüce (2007).
 
28
Feyzioğlu (1977), p. 286; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 419; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 230.
 
29
Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 418.
 
30
For further explanations see Reisoğlu (1977), Reisoğlu (1983), Barlas (1986), Kahyaoğlu (1996), Reisoğlu (1997), Doğan (2002).
 
31
Engel (1997), p. 430; Becker (1941), art. 111, N. 2; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 414; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 228; Eren (2015), p. 1153; Reisoğlu (2014), p. 395; Feyzioğlu (1977), pp. 286–287.
 
32
Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 415; Eren (2015), p. 1153.
 
33
Engel (1997), p. 435; Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 111, N. 19–25; Feyzioğlu (1977), pp. 288–289; Tekinay et al. (1993), pp. 233–238; Eren (2015), pp. 1155–1156; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), pp. 415–418.
 
34
For further explanations see Elçin Grassinger (1996), Özen (2016).
 
35
See Sect. 3.​2.​2.​2.
 
36
Pouvoir de disposer, Verfügungsmacht.
 
37
Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 426.
 
38
Engel (1997), p. 430; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 429; Eren (2015), p. 1159; Reisoğlu (2014), p. 394.
 
39
It should be kept in mind that if the guarantor is a natural person, then the maximum amount of the guarantor’s liability must be indicated in the guarantor’s own handwriting. This is because the TCO art. 583 par. 1 states that a surety contract must be in writing and that the date and maximum amount of the surety’s liability must be indicated in the surety’s own handwriting. These rules are applied by analogy to guarantees provided by natural persons (TCO art. 603). Consequently, in such a case, if the maximum amount of the guarantor’s liability is not indicated in the guarantor’s own handwriting, then the guarantee contract is void.
 
40
Becker (1941), art. 111, N. 14; Oser and Schönenberger (1929), art. 111, N. 10; Engel (1997), p. 435; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 429; Nomer (2015), p. 412; Eren (2015), p. 1159.
 
41
Cf. Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 431.
 
42
Oğuzman and Öz (2016), pp. 431–432.
 
43
Engel (1997), p. 434; Reisoğlu (2014), p. 399; Eren (2015), p. 1160.
 
44
Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 433.
 
45
Eren (2015), p. 1160; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 433.
 
46
Eren (2015), p. 1160; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 434.
 
47
Engel (1997), p. 434.
 
48
Reisoğlu (2014), p. 400; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 435; Eren (2015), p. 1160.
 
49
Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 435–436; Eren (2015), p. 1160; Reisoğlu (2014), p. 399.
 
50
Stipulation pour autrui, Vertrag zugunsten eines Dritten.
 
51
For further explanations see Akyol (2008).
 
52
Promettant, Promittent.
 
53
Stipulant, Promissar, Versprechensempfänger.
 
54
Tiers, Dritte; Bénéficiaire, Begünstigte.
 
55
Engel (1997), p. 417; Tercier (2004), p. 190; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 438; Feyzioğlu (1977), p. 271; Becker (1941), art. 112, N. 1.
 
56
Engel (1997), p. 420; Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 112, N. 7; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 219; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 449; Reisoğlu (2014), p. 401.
 
57
Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 112, N. 5; Eren (2015), p. 1142; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 438; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 227; Becker (1941), art. 112, N. 4.
 
58
Eren (2015), p. 1142; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 438.
 
59
Oğuzman and Öz (2016), pp. 446–447.
 
60
Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 447.
 
61
Acte de disposition, Verfügungsgeschäft. See Chap. 14, fn. 5–6.
 
62
Engel (1997), p. 421; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), pp. 447–448.
 
63
Oğuzman and Öz (2016), pp. 448–449.
 
64
Tercier (2004), p. 190; Engel (1997), p. 419; Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 112, N. 10; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 220; Nomer (2015), p. 414.
 
65
Pouvoir de disposer, Verfügungsmacht.
 
66
Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 451.
 
67
von Tuhr and Escher (1974), § 82, I, 1, p. 237; Engel (1997), p. 419–420; compare to Becker (1941), art. 112, N: 23, 24, cf. Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 451 fn. 123.
 
68
von Tuhr and Escher (1974), § 82, I, 1, p. 237; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 226; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), pp. 451–452.
 
69
Tercier (2004), p. 190; Engel (1997), p. 420; Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 112, N. 16.
 
70
von Tuhr and Escher (1974), § 83, I, p. 246; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 452.
 
71
See Chap. 28.
 
72
Becker (1941), art. 112. N. 27; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 453.
 
73
Engel (1997), p. 422; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 441.
 
74
Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 442.
 
75
Pouvoir de disposer, Verfügungsmacht.
 
76
Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 455.
 
Literature
Akyol Ş (2008) Tam üçüncü şahıs yararına sözleşme. Vedat, İstanbul
Antalya OG (2012) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler, vol 1. Legal, İstanbul
Aybay A (2011) Borçlar hukuku dersleri genel bölüm. Filiz, İstanbul
Barlas N (1986) Türk hukuk sisteminde banka teminat mektupları. İstanbul
Becker H (1941) Kommentar zum Schweizerischen Zivilgesetzbuch, vol VI, Obligationenrecht, 1. Abteilung: Allgemeine Bestimmungen, Art. 1-183. Stämpfli, Bern
Berger B (2012) Allgemeines Schuldrecht. Stämpfli, Bern
Doğan V (2002) Banka teminat mektupları. Savaş, Ankara
Elçin Grassinger G (1996) Borçlar kanununa göre kefilin alacaklıya karşı sahip olduğu savunma imkânları. Alfa, İstanbul
Engel P (1997) Traité des obligations en droit Suisse. Stämpfli, Bern
Eren F (2015) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler. Yetkin, Ankara
Feyzioğlu FN (1976) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler, vol 1. Fakülteler, İstanbul
Feyzioğlu FN (1977) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler, vol 2. Fakülteler, İstanbul
Gauch P, Schluep W R, Emmenegger S (2008) Schweizerisches Obligationenrecht, Allgemeiner Teil, vol 2. Schulthess, Zürich
Gümüş MA (2003) Türk medeni kanununun getirdiği yeni şerhler. Vedat, İstanbul
Honsell H, Vogt NP, Wiegand W (eds) (2003) Basler Kommentar zum Schweizerischen Privatrecht, Obligationenrecht 1: Art. 1-529 OR. Helbing Lichtenhahn, Basel
Kahyaoğlu EC (1996) Banka garantileri. İstanbul
Kapancı KB (2016) Ahlaka aykırı bir fiille kasten verilen zararın tazmini. Vedat, İstanbul
Karabağ Bulut N (2009) Üçüncü kişiyi koruyucu etkili sözleşme. On iki levha, İstanbul
Kılıçoğlu A (1979) Türk borçlar hukukunda kanuni halefiyet. Ankara üniversitesi, Ankara
Kılıçoğlu AM (2013) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler. Turhan, İstanbul
Kocayusufpaşaoğlu N (2014) Borçlar hukuku genel bölüm, vol 1 (Kocayusufpaşaoğlu/Hatemi/Serozan/Arpacı). Filiz, İstanbul
Nomer HN (2015) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler. Beta, İstanbul
Nomer HN, Ergüne S (2016) Eşya hukuku. On iki levha, İstanbul
Oğuzman K, Öz T (2015) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler, vol 1. Vedat, İstanbul
Oğuzman K, Öz T (2016) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler, vol 2. Vedat, İstanbul
Oğuzman K, Seliçi Ö, Oktay-Özdemir S (2016) Eşya hukuku. Filiz, İstanbul
Oser H, Schönenberger W (1929) Kommentar zum Schweizerischen Zivilgesetzbuch, Volume V: Das Obligationenrecht, Erster Halbband: Art. 1-183. Schulthess, Zürich
Özen B (2016) 6098 sayılı Türk borçlar kanunu çerçevesinde kefalet sözleşmesi. Vedat, İstanbul
Reisoğlu K (1958) İstihdam edenlerin mesuliyeti. Ankara
Reisoğlu S (1963) Garanti mukavelesi. Ajans-Türk, Ankara
Reisoğlu S (1977) Banka teminat mektupları ve uygulamada ortaya çıkan sorunlar. Ankara
Reisoğlu S (1983) Türk hukukunda ve bankacılık uygulamasında teminat mektupları - kontrgarantiler. Ankara
Reisoğlu S (1997) Banka teminat mektupları ve kontrgarantiler. Ankara
Reisoğlu S (2014) Türk borçlar hukuku genel hükümler. Beta, İstanbul
Schwenzer I (2009) Schweizerisches Obligationenrecht, Allgemeiner Teil. Schulthess, Bern
Serozan R (2014) Borçlar hukuku genel bölüm, Volume 3 (Kocayusufpaşaoğlu/Hatemi/Serozan/Arpacı). Filiz, İstanbul
Steinauer PH (2007) Les droits réels, vol 1. Stämpfli, Bern
Sungurbey İ (1963) Kişisel hakların tapu kütüğüne şerhi. İstanbul
Tandoğan H (1959) Garanti mukavelesi. Ankara
Tekinay SS, Akman S, Burcuoğlu H, Altop A (1993) Tekinay borçlar hukuku genel hükümler. Filiz, İstanbul
Tercier P (2004) Le droit des obligations. Schulthess, Zurich
Tercier P, Pichonnaz P, Develioğlu HM (2016) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler. On iki levha, İstanbul
Thévenoz L, Werro F (éd) (2012) Commentaire romand code des obligations 1: art. 1-529 CO. Helbing Lichtenhahn, Bâle
von Tuhr A, Peter H (1979) Allgemeiner Teil des Schweizerischen Obligationenrecht, vol 1. Schulthess, Zürich
von Tuhr A, Escher A (1974) Allgemeiner Teil des Schweizerischen Obligationenrecht, vol 2. Schulthess, Zürich
Yüce MB (2007) Garanti sözleşmesinin bir türü olarak üçüncü kişinin fiilini taahhüt sözleşmesi. Vedat, İstanbul
Metadata
Title
Effects of the Obligation on Third Parties
Author
İlhan Helvacı
Copyright Year
2017
Book
Turkish Contract Law

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60060-4

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-60061-1

Copyright Year: 2017

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60061-1_24

Premium Partner

    Image Credits