TBK m. 186 ve TBK m. 188 f. 1 Hükümleri Işığında Alacağın Devrinde Borçlunun Devir Anından Sonra Ortaya Çıkan Savunmaları

In the assignment of receivables, it is accepted that the debtor may also raise against the assignee the defenses he could assert against the assignor. This principle is expressly stated in Article 188 (1) of the TCO. Undoubtedly, such defenses relate to the assigned receivable. Article 188 (1) limits the defenses that the debtor may assert against the assignee to those existing at the moment the debtor becomes aware of the assignment. From this provision it follows that the debtor may still acquire new defenses against the assignor even after the assignment. Yet, upon the assignment, the assignor loses the power of disposition over the claim. Nevertheless, Article 188 (1) protects the debtor's reliance on the legal appearance that the assignor remains the creditor, in cases where the debtor is unaware of the assignment. Consequently, legal transactions concluded between the debtor and the assignor after the assignment, may be invoked against the assignee as though they were legally valid. Similarly to Article 188(1) of the TCO, Article 186 provides that if a debtor who has not been notified of the assignment performs in good faith to the assignor instead of the assignee, the debtor is released from the debt. While both provisions aim to protect the debtor who is unaware of the assignment, the requirements of each provision differ. This study examines the requirements set forth in these provisions and, within this framework, discusses how the relationship between them ought to be construed.