Geçici Mühlete Karar Verilmeden Önce Doğan Borcun Borçlu Tarafından Mühlet Esnasında Ödenmesi

Deciding on a temporary respite does not abolish the debtor's power of disposition over her assets. However, validation of the legal transactions stipulated in the second paragraph of Article 297 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law depends on the court's permission. It is not possible for the debtor to freely carry out the legal transactions listed in the article. In addition, the court may subject the valid execution of certain transactions to the commissioner's permission while deciding on the respite or during the respite or may decide that the commissioner should continue the business activity instead of the debtor (EBL Article 297/I). Apart from the aforementioned limitations, the debtor, as a rule, has the power of disposition during the concordat respite. At this point, it is important to determine whether it is possible to pay the debts arising before the temporary respite is decided by the debtor during the respite, since it is not among the disposition restrictions listed in the Law. It should be noted that the issue in question is controversial in both Turkish and Swiss law. For this reason, in this study, it is tried to explain the questions of whether the payment will be valid and whether a sanction can be applied to the debtor due to payment in case of payment of debts arising before the temporary respite is decided. In this context, the issue is also evaluated in terms of the principle of equality between the creditors in the concordat and the purpose of the concordat.