ERDEM-NEWSLETTER-2018-metin

306 NEWSLETTER 2018 public interest and must not be disproportional, and it must not impose an excessive burden on the owner. In the rule, subject to an objection that constitutes an interference with the rights concerning property, it is accepted that the reverse cannot be claimed and proven that onerous transactions between relatives by blood to the third degree (including this degree) take on the form of donations, without being dependent on any other conditions. In this respect, the fact that the value of the goods that are subject to the transaction is paid in whole, or in excess, the transaction is in favor of the debtor’s creditors, and the creditors are not damaged because of the transaction, and that the collection and compulsory execution activities by the creditors regarding the debt have not been made more difficult and, instead, have been facilitated, will not change the result. The provision in question that is subject to objection, which deduced that onerous transactions between relatives by blood to the third degree (including this degree) are treated as donations, does not provide any opportunity to the parties to make a claim or defense on the matters mentioned, and evidence, information and documents must be presented in order to prove these matters. From this aspect, it cannot be said that the regulation that damages the reasonable balance to the owner’s detriment, and which must be regarded as interference in the rights concerning property and the purpose intended, is not proportional to the intention. The rule that is subject to objection causes the restric- tion of rights concerning property, as well as the freedom to claim rights, disproportionately, through damaging the balance between public and personal interest. In this respect, it has been decided that the term “ kin - ship by blood or… ” in this Article does not comply with Articles 13, 35 and 36 of the Constitution. The annulment decision was published in the Official Gazette on 15 November 2018, and will enter into force nine months after its publication in the Official Gazette. In subparagraph (2) of the third paragraph of Article 278 of the EBL, which is subject to the annulment, regardless of the degree of closeness between the parties of the contract, it is set forth that the contracts in which the debtor accepts a very low price in return thereof shall be accepted as donations. The Constitutional Court, which re- viewed the provision subject to the request for annulment, has stated that that intention by the relevant regulation to prevent questionable transactions that are made in the period prior to the arrest, insolvency