404 / 522
In accordance with Article 177/3 of the EBL, refusal of the offered
arrangement with creditors, removal of the arrangement period and
dissolution of the arrangement are grounds for the direct bankruptcy;
however, refusal of its request for arrangement period would not con-
stitute a ground for direct bankruptcy as per art. 177/3 and 301 of the
EBL
7
. Nevertheless, the refusal of request for arrangement period by
the enforcement court might be interpreted that the debtor has sus-
pended its payments. In addition, in the case of restructuring by way of
reconciliation, the courts declare the bankruptcy of the debtor if the
debtor does not comply with its obligations arising from the project or
the rights of the financing creditor is not satisfied
8
.
The last ground provided by Article 177 of the EBL is non-pay-
ment of a debt approved by a court decision although it has been
requested by a statutory demand, and which is also accepted by the
Court of Cassation’s decisions
9
: “
According to the fact that (…) the
statutory demand is notified, that it is adequate to accept that bank-
ruptcy request and court decision was due pursuant to art. 166 of the
EBL; and that no additional payment order was required as Art. 177/4
of the EBL provides grounds for direct bankruptcy case (…).
” The
prior court decision does not have to become definitive in order to ini-
tiate the direct bankruptcy case. However, in practice, the courts sus-
pend the direct bankruptcy case until the decision of the Court of
Cassation is granted if the debtor obtains a decision for suspension of
execution proceedings
10
. It is controversial among the scholars whether
a direct bankruptcy case may be initiated if the enforcement proceed-
ing is based on a document that substitutes a court decision, and the
Court of Cassation has rendered different decisions with this regard
11
.
In addition to the above, various other grounds for direct bank-
ruptcy are provided regarding the general partnership and limited part-
388
NEWSLETTER 2015
7
Court of Cassation 19
th
Civil Chamber, Date 24.04.2003, No E. 2002/10298, K. 2003/4431
(www.kazanci.com).
8
Kuru/Arslan/Yılmaz,
p. 495.
9
Court of Cassation 19
th
Civil Chamber, Date 03.03.2005, No E. 2004/12356, K. 2005/2159
(www.kazanci.com)10
Altay
, p. 473.
11
Altay
, p. 474.