CC BY
821. Federal'nyj zakon ot 11.06.2022 N 169-FZ «O vnesenii izmenenij v Federal'nyj zakon «O razvitii sel'skogo hozyajstva» // SZ RF. 13.06.2022. № 24. st. 3929.
ЕЛЬНИКОВА ЕЛЕНА ВАСИЛЬЕВНА - кандидат юридических наук, доцент, кафедра предпринимательского и корпоративного права Московского государственного юридического университета имени О.Е. Кутафина (МГЮА). ELNIKOVA ELENA - Ph.D. in Law, Associate Professor, Department of Entrepreneurial and Corporate Law, Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL) (femida-67@yandex.ru).
УДК 347.44(560) DOI: 10.24412/2411-2275-2022-3-188-191
ХАЛИЛОВ Р.С.
ПЕРЕДАЧА КОММЕРЧЕСКОГО ПРЕДПРИЯТИЯ В ПОРЯДКЕ НЕЗАРЕГИСТРИРОВАННОГО ПРИОБРЕТЕНИЯ В РАМКАХ СТАТЬИ 705 ГРАЖДАНСКОГО КОДЕКСА ТУРЦИИ
Ключевые слова: торговые компании, передача коммерческого предприятия, незарегистрированное приобретение, объяснительная регистрация.
В отличие от случаев приобретения путем регистрации, приобретение недвижимого имущества признается незарегистрированным приобретением в случаях передачи коммерческого предприятия и слияния хозяйственных товариществ. Но в доктринах коммерческого и гражданского права существует конфликт по поводу того, когда собственность может быть приобретена. Хотя в Коммерческом кодексе Турции № 6102 есть четкое положение по этому вопросу, единого мнения в доктрине до сих пор нет. Особое внимание уделяется исследованию с учетом взглядов на доктрину коммерческого и гражданского права и практики Верховного суда Турции. По этой причине поясняется, что в случае передачи коммерческого предприятия и слияния хозяйственных товариществ будет известно, в какой момент произойдет приобретение недвижимого имущества. Место этого института в турецком и азербайджанском законодательстве также оценивается в рамках достигнутых результатов и текущих событий, касающихся предмета.
KHALiLOV, R.S.
TRANSFER OF COMMERCiAL ENTERPRiSE iN TERMS OF UNREGiSTERED ACQUiSiTiONS WiTHiN THE FRAMEWORK OF ARTiCLE 705 OF THE TURKISH CiViL CODE
Key worlds: Trading Companies, Transfer of Commercial Enterprise, Unregistered Acquisition, Explanatory Registration.
Unlike the cases of gain by registration, the acquisition of immovable property is accepted as unregistered acquisition in cases of transfer of commercial enterprise and merger of commercial partnerships. But there is conflict in the commercial and civil law doctrines over when property can be acquired. Although there is a clear provision on this issue in the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102, there is still no consensus in the doctrine. The study is especially examined by taking into account his views in the commercial and civil law doctrine and the practice of the Supreme Court. For this reason, it is explained that in the case of the transfer of the commercial enterprise and the merger of the commercial partnerships, the acquisition of the immovable property will be known at what moment. The place of this institution in Turkish and Azerbaijani law is also evaluated within the framework of the results reached and current developments concerning the subject.
The concept of commercial enterprise constitutes the central concept of both the old Turkish Commercial Code No. 6762 and the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 and determines the application area of these laws. Although commercial enterprise is the basic concept of commercial law, the definition of the concept of commercial enterprise was not made directly in the old Turkish Commercial Code, and the definition was left to the Trade Registry Regulation. In the articles 11 to 13 of the old Turkish Commercial Code numbered 6762, only some types of commercial enterprises were regulated. However, the definition of this concept and the determination of its elements were left to the doctrine. In the Justification of Article 11 of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102, the concept of commercial enterprise is "the basis of the commercial enterprise law; that is, the central concept; it is determinative, even descriptive in this nature, commercial law has become the foreign law of the commercial enterprise in the intervening time and has transformed from a concept to a theory [40, p. 4].
Article 11 paragraph 1 of the new Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102, with the provision that "it is the enterprise in which the activities aiming to generate income exceeding the limit set for the tradesman enterprise are carried out continuously and independently", have been made by making use of the definition in the Trade Registry Regulation during the period of the former Turkish Commercial Code No. 6762. describes the business. Based on this definition given by the law, in order for a business to be considered as a commercial enterprise, it is necessary to have the elements of exceeding the limit of the artisan enterprise, aiming to provide income, continuity and independence in its activities.
The contract for the transfer of the commercial enterprise is made between the transferor of the commercial enterprise and the transferee. In the former Commercial Code numbered 6762, article 11, paragraph 2, it was regulated that the commercial enterprise could be the subject of different contracts, with a closed expression, by taking into consideration the elements included in the commercial enterprise with the counting method. However, the provision of article 11 paragraph 3 of the Turkish Commercial
Code No. 6102 clearly mentions the transfer agreement and other legal transactions that deal with the commercial enterprise as a whole. This issue is also stated in the article 56 paragraph 2 of the Azerbaijani Civil Code. Thus, the aforementioned provisions of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 and the Azerbaijani Civil Code include not only the transfer agreement, but also other agreements dealing with the commercial enterprise as a whole [34, p. 104]. However, it is also accepted in the doctrine that the transfer of all elements included in the assets of the commercial enterprise is not mandatory, but that the elements subject to the transfer must at least form a commercial enterprise [35, p. 45; 5, p. 42; 13, p. 38; 10, p. 232; 1, p.167].
The Turkish Commercial Code numbered 6102, the written condition for the contracts made regarding the transfer of the commercial enterprise, which is not included in the former Commercial Code in terms of form, is stated in article 11 paragraph 3 of the Turkish Commercial Code, "With this transfer contract, other contracts that cover the commercial enterprise as a whole are made in writing." is stipulated. In addition, this condition is clearly regulated in Article 133 of the Trade Registry Regulation, titled "Transfer of Commercial Enterprise" (paragraph 2). With the regulation of the Azerbaijani Civil Code in article 57 paragraph 2 that the transfer agreement must be approved by the board of directors of the transferred enterprise or the body authorized by the charter, it indicates that the transfer agreement must be in writing [21, p. 207-208; 22, p. 156; 3, p. 468]. However, there is no clarity in the law as to whether this condition is a validity condition or not. In the doctrine, it is accepted that this condition is a validity condition [5, p. 43; 13, p. 39; 37, p. 12; 20, p. 996; 10, p. 234; 1, p. 170; 19, p. 104; 27, p. 593; 35, p. 45; 36, p. 383]. The provisions of the Turkish Code of Obligations, article 12, paragraph 2 and the Azerbaijani Civil Code, article 329, paragraph 1 also confirm this view defended in the doctrine.
However, the transfer of the commercial enterprise becomes valid by registration in the trade registry. The provision of article 11 paragraph 3 of the Turkish Commercial Code numbered 6102, with the regulation stating that "commercial enterprise can be transferred as a whole without the necessity of performing the compulsory savings transactions for the transfer of the assets it contains", brought a fundamental change to the system existing in the old Commercial Code period, It stipulates that the elements of assets that constitute it can be transferred with a single written contract without the need for separate transfer. Azerbaycan such a regulation is not included in the Azerbaijani Civil Code. However, since it is foreseen that the elements included in the commercial enterprise as a whole in article 56 paragraph 2 and it is foreseen in article 57 paragraph 1 that all assets and liabilities related to the commercial enterprise will pass through succession, the same conclusion is reached indirectly.
In other words, as explained in article 11 paragraph 3 of the Turkish Commercial Code, with the transfer of the commercial enterprise, all assets and liabilities and all partnership rights regarding the commercial enterprise pass to the transferee without any other conditions. According to Tekinalp [37, p. 13], this regulation accepts that the commercial enterprise as a whole is subject to legal transactions, and after the commercial enterprise pledge, it brings an exception to the principle of certainty that dominates the Turkish property law, with a wide scope of influence, and separates the various assets that make up the commercial enterprise. It departs from the principle that considers it necessary to be transferred by transaction. Pursuant to this amendment brought with the article 11 paragraph 3 of the Turkish Commercial Code, the assets (for example, immovables, ships, brands, motor transport vehicles) that are included in the commercial enterprise and acquired by registration in the private registry, are transferred to the transferee within the scope of the enterprise, with the registration of the commercial enterprise transfer agreement, without the registration in their own registry [39, p. 187; 20, p. 997; 27, p. 594; 18, p. 5]. In other words, the obligation of ceding immovables in the title deed, transfer of possession for movables, registration of trademarks in the trademark registry in the name of the transferee is eliminated. The transfer of rights and obligations occurs spontaneously, just as in inheritance. In short, a written transfer agreement is sufficient for the transfer of the commercial enterprise as a whole, and the rights and obligations are transferred in a single transaction. In this context, registration is not a requirement for immovable property to be acquired by the person who has taken over the commercial enterprise. It can be said that a new situation of unregistered gain has arisen here. The registration to be made in the land registry will have an explanatory [7, p. 295; 4, p. 695; 33, N. 1558; 2, p. 121; 24, s. 484; 12, p. 113; 23, p. 289; 8, p. 129; 39, p. 186; 13, p. 39; 34, p. 108; 38, p. 61; 37, p. 12; 27, p. 599; 17, p. 586; 32, p. 91; 16, p. 83; 15, p. 22; 31, p. 85-86; 11, p. 138; 30, p. 69; 28, p. 33-34; 14, p. 38; 29, p. 74-75; 5, p. 43].
However, without this corrective registration, it is not possible for the acquiring company to dispose of the immovable that it legally owns (Turkish Civil Code article 705 paragraph 2).
However, according to inal, since the assets of the commercial enterprise consist of movable and immovable properties within the scope of the provision of article 11 paragraph 2 of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102, it will also be necessary to comply with the form condition of the property that is considered to be included in the commercial enterprise and is subject to the transfer process. In case the property subject to the transfer is an immovable, the transfer transaction between the parties must be done in an official manner and by binding it to the official deed to be made in front of the land registry officer (Turkish Civil Code article 706 paragraph 1). According to the author, since the principle of universal succession is not the subject of the transfer of the commercial enterprise, the debiting and disposition transactions must be performed separately during the execution of the transfer agreement [26, p. 243]. Aydin, on the other hand, stated that the provision of article 11, paragraph 3 of the Turkish Commercial Code was not clear as to whether the registration was a founder or not, and since the registration has an explanatory effect as a rule in accordance with the trade registry law, it should be accepted that the registration is explanatory, but in terms of legal security, it should be accepted that the registration is the founder, referring to Arici [9, p. 9]. According to Sirmen, although Aydin criticized the exception in paragraph 3 of Article 11 of the Turkish Commercial Code in his aforementioned article for eliminating the official form requirement in the transfer of immovables, the essence of the problem stems from the elimination of the principle of registration [36, p. 206, footnote 422; 6, p. 215].
According to Sirmen, in fact, the Turkish Commercial Code art. There is no doubt that the legislator aims to transfer the commercial enterprise as a whole with a written contract and with the registration and announcement to the trade registry in the provisions of paragraph 11 of paragraph 3. However, the provision of article 11 paragraph 3 of the Turkish Commercial Code is not an explicit provision. There is no clarity in this provision as to whether the registration to be made in the trade registry is a founder or not. However, the provision in article 133 paragraph 3 of the Trade Registry Regulation stating that "the transfer of the commercial enterprise shall be effective with the registration of the entire transfer agreement" states that the registration made in the trade registry has a constituent character, and that the ownership of the immovables belonging to the commercial enterprise is also registered in the land registry. confirms that it is requested to be transferred by registration to the trade registry [36, p. 206-207].
References and Sources
1. Akay, M. H., "Ticari i^letme Devrinde Güncel Sorunlar (6102 sayili TTK m. 11/3 kapsaminda)", Journal of Medipol University Faculty of Law (1), 2014, p. 163-178.
2. Akipek, J., Türk E§ya Hukuku (Ayni Haklar), Second Book Property, 2nd Edition, Ankara, Sevinf Printing House, 1973.
3. Allahverdiyev, S., Azsrbaycan Respublikasinin Mülki Hüquq Kursu, Volume I General Part II Edition, Baku, Digesta Publishing, 2008.
4. Antalya, O. G. - Topuz, M., Marmara Hukuk Yorumu Medeni Hukuk Giri§ Temel Kavramlar Ba^langif Hükümleri Cilt I, 3rd Extended Edition, Ankara, Sefkin Publishing, Ankara, Sefkin Publications, 2019.
5. Arkan, S., Ticari i^letme Hukuku, Reprint from the Twenty-Sixth Edition, Edited and Expanded with Recent Changes, Ankara, Banking and Commercial Law Research Institute (T. i§ Bankasi A.§. Foundation), 2020.
6. Arici, M. F., Ticari i^letmenin Aktif ve Pasifi ile Devri, Istanbul, Vedat Publications, 2008.
7. Ayan, M., E§ya Hukuku II Mülkiyet, 10th Revised Edition, Ankara, Adalet Publishing, 2020.
8. Aybay, A. - Hatemi, H., E§ya Hukuku Dersleri, Istanbul, Fakülteler Printing House, 1981.
9. Aydin, A., "6102 sayili (yeni) Türk Ticaret Kanunu'na göre Ticari i^letme Kavrami ve Ticari i^letmenin Hukuki i^lemlere Konu Olmasi", Kadir Has University Faculty of Law - Symposium of Innovations in the Field of Commercial Business Law brought by the New Turkish Commercial Code (25-26 November 2011), Istanbul, 2012, s. 9-20.
10. Aydin, S. - Kaplan, H. A. - Kalyon, A. §., "Ticari i^letme Devri ve Devrin Hukuki Sonuflari", Journal of Gazi University Faculty of Law, Volume XVII, Issue 1-2, p. 229-260.
11. Ayhan, R. - Qaglar, H., Ticari i^letme Hukuku Genel Esaslar, Revised and Updated 11th Edition, Ankara, Yetkin Publications, 2018.
12. Ayiter, N., E§ya Hukuku, (Short Textbook), 3rd Edition, Ankara, Sava§ Publishing, 1987.
13. Bahtiyar, M., Ticari i^letme Hukuku, Updates 21st Edition, Istanbul, Beta Publishing Distribution, 2020.
14. Bilgili, F. - Demirkapi, E., Ticari i^letme Hukuku, 3rd Edition, Bursa, Dora Publications, 2012.
15. Bozer, A. - Göle, C., Ticari i^letme Hukuku, Updated and Enlarged 5th Edition, Ankara, Banking and Commercial LawResearch Institute, 2018.
16. Bozkurt, T., Ticari i^letme Hukuku, Updated 13 th Edition, Ankara, Yetkin Publications, 2018.
17. Bozkurt, T., §irketler Hukuku, Updated 13th Edition, Ankara, Yetkin Publications, 2021.
18. Qelik, A., Ticaret Hukuku, Updated 9th Edition, Ankara, Sefkin Publishing, 2019.
19. Demir, K., "Ticari i^letmenin Devrinde Yeni Dönem; Eski ve Yeni Sorunlar", Istanbul University Faculty of Law Magazine, Volume LXXI, Issue 2, 2013, p. 103-120.
20. Erdem, H. E., "Türk Ticaret Kanunu Uyarinca Ticari i^letmenin Devri", Ya§ar University Faculty of Law Journal, Volume 8, Prof. Dr. Special Issue of Gift to Aydin Zevkliler, 2013, s. 987-1018.
21. össdov, B., Azsrbaycan Respublikasi Mülki Mscsltasinin Elmi-Praktik Kommentariyasi, 5 Volumes, I Volume, Baku, Hüquq Publishing, 2017.
22. ösgsrov, i., Azsrbaycan Respublikasi Mülki Mscsllssinin Kommentariyasi, I Book, Revised 5th Edition, Baku, Qanun Publishing, 2014.
23. Gürsoy, K. T., Türk E§ya Hukukunda Zilyetlik ve Tapu Sicili, Ankara, Ankara University Faculty of Law Publications, 1970.
24. Hatemi, H. - Serozan, R. - Arpaci, A., E§ya Hukuku, Istanbul, Filiz Publishig, 1991.
25. imregün, O., Kara Ticaret Hukuku Dersleri (Genel Hükümler - Ortakliklar - Kiymetli Evrak), 11th Revised Supplementary Edition, Istanbul, Filiz Publications, 1996.
26. inal, T., 6102 sayili Türk Ticaret Kanununa ve Yenilenen Diger ilgili Mevzuata Göre Hazirlanmiç Ticari i^letme Hukuku Uluslararasi Ticari Sözle^meler incoterms 2010, Updated 2nd Editions, Ankara, Seçkin Publications, 2015.
27. Kahraman, Z., "Ticari içletmenin Devrinde Aktif ve Pasiflerin intikali", Gift in Memory of Prof. Dr. Özer Seliçi, Bahçe^ehir University Faculty of Law Journal, Special issue, Volume 11, issue 145-146, Ankara, Seçkin Publishing, 2016, p. 587-630.
28. Karahan, S., Ticari i^letme Hukuku, 27th Editions, Konya, Mimoza Publications, 2015.
29. Kayar, i., 6102 sayili Türk Ticaret Kanunu'na Göre, Ticaret Hukuku, Updated 5th Edition, Ankara, Seçkin Publications, 2018.
30. Kayar, i., Ticari i^letme Hukuku, Updated 11th Edition, Ankara, Seçkin Publications, 2018.
31. Kayihan, §., Ticari i^letme Hukuku, 6. Baski, Ankara, Seçkin Yayincilik, 2019.
32. Kayihan, §., Çirketler Hukuku, 4th Revised Edition, Ankara, Seçkin Publications, 2020.
33. Oguzman, M. K. - Seliçi, Ö. - Oktay-Özdemir S., E§ya Hukuku, 22nd Revised Enlarged Edition, istanbul, Filiz Publishing, 2020.
34. Öz, T., "Ticari içletme Malvarliginin Devine iliçkin Yeni Türk Ticaret Kanunu Düzenlemesi", Ersin Çamoglu'na Armagan, Istanbul, Vedat Bookselling, 2013.
35. Poroy, R. - Yasaman, H., Ticari i^letme Hukuku, Enlarged and Updated 18th Edition, Istanbul, Vedat Bookselling, 2019.
36. Sirmen, L., E§ya Hukuku, 8th Edition, Ankara, Yetkin Publishing, 2020.
37. Tekinalp, Ü., "Türk Ticaret Hukukunu Ticari i^letme Baglaminda Yeniden Dü^ünmek", Journal of Banking and Commercial Law, Volume XXIV, Issue 5, 2008, p. 5-16.
38. Topuz, M., "Ticari i^letmenin Devrinde Tasarruf içlemlerine iliçkin Çekil Sorunu", 6102 Sayili Türk Ticaret Kanunu'nu Beklerken (10-11-12 Mayis 2012), Marmara University Faculty of Law Journal of Legal Studies, Volume, Issue 2, Special Issue, 2012, 19-79.
39. Ülgen, H. - Helvaci, M. - Kendigelen, A. - Kaya, A. - Ertan, N. F. N., Ticari i^letme Hukuku, Updated and Partially Rewritten Sixth Edition, Istanbul, Vedat Publishing, Istanbul, Vedat Publishing, 2019.
40. http://www2.tbmm.gov.tr/d22/171-1138.pdf (03.09.2022, 20:48).
ХАЛИЛОВ, РАМИЛЬ САБИР ОГЛЫ - доктор юриспруденции, юрист Министерства труда и социальной защиты Азербайджанской Республики, юридический факультет Стамбульского университета, кафедра гражданского права Orcid No: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6740-9201 (ramilkhalilov1986@gmail.com).
KHALiLOV, RAMÏL S. - Doctor of Jurisprudence, Lawyer of Labor and Social Protection of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Istanbul University Faculty of Law, Department of Civil Law Orcid (ramilkhalilov1986@gmail.com).
УДК 347.78:340.11 DOI: 10.24412/2411-2275-2022-3-191-195
ЕПИФАНОВ А.Е., АЛИМОВА Е.Н. К ВОПРОСУ ОБЕСПЕЧЕНИЯ АВТОРСКИХ ПРАВ ПРИ ЦИФРОВИЗАЦИИ
ЗДРАВООХРАНЕНИЯ
Ключевые слова: государство, охрана здоровья, цифровое здравоохранение, авторские права, патентоспособность, личность, права человека.
В статье анализируются особенности правового регулирования отношений в области интеллектуальной собственности цифровых технологий применительно к практике общественного здравоохранения в Российской Федерации. Авторами рассматриваются проблемы и перспективы дальнейшего слияния сферы охраны здоровья и цифровых технологий. Отмечается, что, несмотря на темпы инноваций в области цифрового здравоохранения, все еще существует неопределенность в отношении того, что патентоспособно, а что нет, а также в определении того, когда патентная защита повысит ценность программного обеспечения. Авторы обращают внимание на концепцию авторского лево, предполагающую, что программное обеспечение может быть изменено. Сделан вывод, что авторское лево позволяет пользователю улучшать программный продукт.
EPIFANOV AE., ALIMOVA, KN. ON THE QUESTION OF ENSHURING COPYRIGHT DURING DIGITALIZATION OF HEALTH CARE
Key words: state, health care, digital health, copyright, patentability, personality, human rights.
The article presents the features of the legal regulation of relations in the field of intellectual property of digital technologies in relation to the practice of public health in the Russian Federation, considers the problems and prospects for further merging of the sphere of health protection and digital technologies. It is noted that, despite the pace of innovation in digital health, there is still uncertainty about what is patentable and what is not, as well as determining when patent protection will add value to software. The authors draw attention to the concept of copyleft, which suggests that software can be modified. It is concluded that copyleft allows the user to improve the software product.
На современном этапе глобальные темпы и масштабы инновационных разработок в сфере общественного здравоохранения выглядят захватывающе. Радикальные изменения технологий происходят стремительно. Если еще недавно организация медицинской помощи требовала значительных затрат при формировании единой цепочки поставок услуг, то ныне цифровые технологии в сфере здравоохранения формируют единое пространство, автоматизирующее и
