Publication: Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin 2014/12321 Başvuru Numaralı ve 20.07.2017 Tarihli Tari Kararı’nın Değerlendirilmesi
Abstract
Arsa payı karşılığı inşaat sözleşmesinde yüklenici, finansal veya ticari sebeplerle, arsa sahibi ile yapmışolduğu arsa payı karşılığı inşaat sözleşmesinden doğan alacağını üçüncü kişiye devredebilir. Kararakonu uyuşmazlıkta da, yüklenicinin bağımsız bölüm ve arsa paylarının devrinin talebine ilişkin alacakhakkını alacağın devri yoluyla üçüncü kişiye devrettiği anlaşılmaktadır. Yüklenici ise sözleşmedekararlaştırılan şekilde inşaatı tamamlamadığı için, arsa sahibinin yüklenici ve üçüncü kişi adına tesciledilmiş olan tapu kayıtlarının iptali ve kendi adına tescili istemi ilk derece mahkemesi, Yargıtay veAnayasa Mahkemesi tarafından kabul edilmiştir. Kanaatimizce, verilen karar sözleşmeden dönmeteorileri, tapu siciline egemen olan ilkeler ve TMK md.2 bağlamında uyandırılan güvene aykırı davranış(çelişkili davranış yasağı) oluşturması ve hukuki güvenlik ilkesini de göz ardı etmesi gerekçeleriyleyerinde değildir.
In the context of construction agreement in return for land and share, as a result of financial and commercial reasons, contractor might assign of his claim to third party from the land owner. In this inspected case, contractor assigned the detached section and landshare claims to the third party. However, afterwards, contractor did not complete the building as agreed in the agreement. Accordingly, land owner brought an action against third party on the basis of cancellation of a land entry and registring them on his own name. This request was accepted by Domestic Court, Court of Appeal and Constitutional Court. However, we are object to court decision. In our opinion, court shall consider the theories of termination of agreement, the principles which are dominant in land registry and the principles of prohibiting contrasting behaviour and legal security.
In the context of construction agreement in return for land and share, as a result of financial and commercial reasons, contractor might assign of his claim to third party from the land owner. In this inspected case, contractor assigned the detached section and landshare claims to the third party. However, afterwards, contractor did not complete the building as agreed in the agreement. Accordingly, land owner brought an action against third party on the basis of cancellation of a land entry and registring them on his own name. This request was accepted by Domestic Court, Court of Appeal and Constitutional Court. However, we are object to court decision. In our opinion, court shall consider the theories of termination of agreement, the principles which are dominant in land registry and the principles of prohibiting contrasting behaviour and legal security.