14. Performance of Obligation

Aybay (2011), p. 112; Becker (1941), Vorbemerkungen zu art. 68–96; Berger (2012), pp. 417–418; Engel (1997), pp. 607–610; Eren (2015), pp. 906–914; Feyzioğlu (1977), pp. 3–9; Gauch et al. (2008), pp. 1–5; Honsell et al. (2003), Vorbemerkungen zu art. 68–74; Kılıçoğlu (2013), p. 536; Nomer (2015), pp. 265–266; Oser and Schönenberger (1929), art. 68–96; Oğuzman and Öz (2015), p. 249; Reisoğlu (2014), pp. 292–294; Schwenzer (2009), pp. 39–41, 495–498; Serozan (2014), pp. 3–22; Tekinay et al. (1993), pp. 758–761; Tercier (2004), pp. 169–172; Tercier et al. (2016), pp. 290–295, 314–320; Thévenoz and Werro (2012), Introduction aux art. 68–83, p. 627–630, and von Tuhr and Escher (1974), pp. 1–11.

Although ‘accessory’ is widely used in European texts, the author has preferred the use of ‘ancillary’ throughout this book to refer to subordinate or dependent rights which cannot exist without the principal obligation.

Nomer (2015), p. 266; Thévenoz and Werro (2012), Introduction aux art.68–83, N. 3; von Tuhr and Escher (1974), § 55, IX, 1, p. 8, compare to Engel (1997), p. 609.

Thévenoz and Werro (2012), Introduction aux art.68–83, N. 3; von Tuhr and Escher (1974), § 55, IX, 1, p. 8.

Dispositive: Relating to disposal. Where a legal transaction reduces one person’s assets, such as the transfer of property or assignment of a claim, this transaction can be defined as a dispositive transaction with regard to him. For further explanations see Ayiter (1953).

Verfügungsgeschäft can be literally translated in to English as ‘transaction of disposal’ (Foster and Sule (2010), p. 416 fn: 23). In order to define Verfügungsgeschäft, a possible translation is ‘dispositional transaction’, Posch (1996), p. 42. Another possible translation is ‘dispository transaction’ (Häcker (2013), p. 20 fn: 15). The author in this book prefers ‘dispositive transaction’ or ‘dispositive act’ (in this sense, Oğuzman (1996), p. 33).

von Tuhr and Escher (1974), § 55, VIII, p. 7.

Oğuzman and Öz (2015), p. 256; von Tuhr and Escher (1974), § 55, IX, 2, p. 9.

Eren (2015), p. 935; Oğuzman and Öz (2015), p. 265.

Oğuzman and Öz (2015), pp. 265–266.

The transfer of possession is of a factual nature. The material transfer of possession must be complemented by the parties’ agreement concerning the transfer of ownership. This agreement is referred to as ‘a real agreement’. It is a bilateral legal act and does not require any specific form. It may be formed by the parties’ express or implied declarations of will (intention). Real agreement (dinglicher Vertrag) is a dispositive act and it is to be distinguished from the causa that is to say the underlying contract which constitutes the obligation to transfer ownership. Real agreements are also different from real contracts (contractus realis) in Roman law. In contractus realis the transfer of possession of the subject matter of the contract represents a constitutive component. See and compare to Kocayusufpaşaoğlu (2014), pp. 96–97; Tercier (2004), p. 131.