Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Joint and Several Debtors

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Turkish Contract Law

  • 472 Accesses

Abstract

In certain cases, there may be several debtors liable to perform the same obligation. If the creditor has the right to demand that each debtor perform the entire obligation, then these debtors are referred to as joint and several debtors. This situation may only arise from a legal transaction, generally a contract, or the law itself.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For further explanations see Akıntürk (1971), Canyürek (2003), Dağdelen (2011), Özdoğan (2015).

  2. 2.

    Débiteurs solidaires, Solidarschuldnern.

  3. 3.

    Feyzioğlu (1977), p. 311; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 458; Nomer (2015), p. 311.

  4. 4.

    Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 293; Feyzioğlu (1977), p. 305; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 465.

  5. 5.

    See Sect. 33.3.

  6. 6.

    Tercier (2004), p. 293.

  7. 7.

    Oser and Schönenberger (1929), art. 143, N. 3; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 294; Eren (2015), p. 1204; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 468; Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 143, N. 6.

  8. 8.

    Dural and Öz (2015), p. 526.

  9. 9.

    Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 144, N. 1; Engel (1997), p. 839.

  10. 10.

    Feyzioğlu (1977), p. 317; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 285; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 471; Nomer (2015), p. 417.

  11. 11.

    Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 286; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 470; Eren (2015), p. 1205.

  12. 12.

    Oser and Schönenberger (1929), art. 144, N. 3; Engel (1997), p. 839; Berger (2012), p. 842.

  13. 13.

    Feyzioğlu (1977), p. 318; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 471.

  14. 14.

    Eren (2015), p. 1207; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 472; Reisoğlu (2014), p. 445.

  15. 15.

    Feyzioğlu (1977), pp. 323–324; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 472; Reisoğlu (2014), p. 445, cf. Tekinay et al. (1993), pp. 299, 1057–1059; Tercier et al. (2016), p. 505.

  16. 16.

    Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 473; Eren (2015), p. 1206; Tercier et al. (2016), p. 506.

  17. 17.

    Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 313; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 473.

  18. 18.

    Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 473.

  19. 19.

    Eren (2015), p. 1206; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 475.

  20. 20.

    Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 480; Eren (2015), pp. 1207–1208.

  21. 21.

    Reisoğlu (2014), p. 445; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 481; Nomer (2015), p. 419.

  22. 22.

    von Tuhr and Escher (1974), § 90, V, 2, p. 307; Thévenoz and Werro (2012), art. 146, N. 3; Tercier (2004), p. 294.

  23. 23.

    Tercier et al. (2016), p. 505; Nomer (2015), p. 419.

  24. 24.

    Oğuzman and Öz (2016), pp. 481–482; Reisoğlu (2014), p. 445; Nomer (2015), pp. 418–419.

  25. 25.

    Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 297; Eren (2015), p. 1213; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 477; Tercier et al. (2016), p. 505; Feyzioğlu (1977), p. 328.

  26. 26.

    Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 478; Eren (2015), p. 1214.

  27. 27.

    Feyzioğlu (1977), p. 331; Eren (2015), pp. 1209–1210; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 485.

  28. 28.

    Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 315; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 485.

  29. 29.

    Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 490; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 319; Reisoğlu (2014), p. 446; Nomer (2015), p. 422.

  30. 30.

    Oğuzman and Öz (2016), p. 491.

  31. 31.

    Feyzioğlu (1977), pp. 336–337, fn. 58; Tekinay et al. (1993), p. 321; Oğuzman and Öz (2016), pp. 491–492.

References

  • Akıntürk T (1971) Müteselsil borçluluk. Ankara

    Google Scholar 

  • Aybay A (2011) Borçlar hukuku dersleri genel bölüm. Filiz, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker H (1941) Kommentar zum Schweizerischen Zivilgesetzbuch, Volume VI, Obligationenrecht, 1. Abteilung: Allgemeine Bestimmungen, Art. 1-183. Stämpfli, Bern

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger B (2012) Allgemeines Schuldrecht. Stämpfli, Bern

    Google Scholar 

  • Canyürek M (2003) Müteselsil borçlulukta iç ve dış ilişkiler. Vedat, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Dağdelen AH (2011) 818 ve 6098 sayılı borçlar kanunlarında borçlular arasında teselsül. On iki levha, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Dural M, Öz T (2015) Miras hukuku. Filiz, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Engel P (1997) Traité des obligations en droit Suisse. Stämpfli, Bern

    Google Scholar 

  • Eren F (2015) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler. Yetkin, Ankara

    Google Scholar 

  • Feyzioğlu FN (1977) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler, vol 2. Fakülteler, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauch P, Schluep WR, Emmenegger S (2008) Schweizerisches Obligationenrecht, Allgemeiner Teil, vol 2. Schulthess, Zürich

    Google Scholar 

  • Honsell H, Vogt NP, Wiegand W (eds) (2003) Basler Kommentar zum Schweizerischen Privatrecht, Obligationenrecht 1: Art. 1-529 OR. Helbing Lichtenhahn, Basel

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapancı KB (2015) Birlikte borçlulukta borçlular arası ilişkiler. Vedat, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Kılıçoğlu AM (2013) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler. Turhan, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Nomer HN (2015) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler. Beta, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Oğuzman K, Öz T (2016) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler, vol 2. Vedat, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Oser H, Schönenberger W (1929) Kommentar zum Schweizerischen Zivilgesetzbuch, Volume V: Das Obligationenrecht, Erster Halbband: Art. 1-183. Schulthess, Zürich

    Google Scholar 

  • Özdoğan N (2015) Müteselsil sorumluluk. Seçkin, Ankara

    Google Scholar 

  • Özsunay E (1983) Borçlar hukuku I. Filiz, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Reisoğlu S (2014) Türk borçlar hukuku genel hükümler. Beta, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwenzer I (2009) Schweizerisches Obligationenrecht, Allgemeiner Teil. Schulthess, Bern

    Google Scholar 

  • Tekinay SS, Akman S, Burcuoğlu H, Altop A (1993) Tekinay borçlar hukuku genel hükümler. Filiz, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Tercier P (2004) Le droit des obligations. Schulthess, Zurich

    Google Scholar 

  • Tercier P, Pichonnaz P, Develioğlu HM (2016) Borçlar hukuku genel hükümler. On iki levha, İstanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Thévenoz L, Werro F (éd) (2012) Commentaire romand code des obligations 1: art. 1-529 CO. Helbing Lichtenhahn, Bâle

    Google Scholar 

  • von Tuhr A, Escher A (1974) Allgemeiner Teil des Schweizerischen Obligationenrecht, vol 2. Schulthess, Zürich

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey

    İlhan Helvacı

Authors
  1. İlhan Helvacı
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Helvacı, İ. (2017). Joint and Several Debtors. In: Turkish Contract Law. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60061-1_27

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60061-1_27

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60060-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60061-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation