NEWSLETTER-2017

238 NEWSLETTER 2017 The View of Non-termination of the Debt Even If the Debtor is Responsible for the Subsequent Unlikelihood of Repayment According to widely accepted doctrinal views, if the debtor is not responsible for the unlikely repayment of the debt, the debt does not terminate, only the content of the debt changes, and the debt trans- forms into compensation liability according to the TCO, Article 112. In synallagmatic contracts, the liability of the creditor to fulfill his debt obligations continues. If the debt does not end, all securities linked to this debt continue to exist, a lapse of time continues, and all defenses related to the debt at the beginning may be brought forward by the creditor in terms of a compensation claim. The View of Terminating the Debt in Cases Where the Debtor is Responsible for the Subsequent Unlikelihood of the Debt Repayment According to another view, termination of the debt by the subse- quent repayment unlikelihood is not related to the fault of the debtor; even if the debtor is at fault, the debt ends - as if the non-repayment has occurred due no fault of his own (Article 136 of TCO) - and the compensation obligation is in line with Article 112 of TCO. The View of the Federal Court in its Decision Dated 21 July 2015 and Numbered 4A_101/2015 The Swiss Federal Court embraced a different view compared to its previous view in its 21 July 2015, 4A_101/2015 numbered deci- sion, which is a follow up to the first view. In this decision, it was ruled that if subsequent unlikelihood of debt repayment occurred due the fault of the debtor, the creditor may revoke the contract if the counter- performance obtained in part holds no significance for him. Indeed, according to this view, which is accepted in the Swiss doctrine and, particularly, by SEROZAN in the Turkish doctrine 1 , 1 Rona Serozan, Termination of the Contract (Sözleşmeden Dönme), İstanbul 2007, p. 265 ff.