NEWSLETTER-2020-metin

61 COMMERCIAL LAW led, if the legal representative or the ones who manage the company are different entities, these entities should be jointly liable, was brought to the Constitutional Court by the Fourth Chamber of the Council of State with a request for cancellation via concrete norm control . The Constitutional Court abrogated the provision stating that this regulation is contrary to the rule of law and would lead to the joint accountability of the legal rep - resentatives who fulfilled their duties and responsibilities on time, and in full, from any action that took place at a time when they were not on duty and had no chance to intervene, and stated that in light of principles of justice and equity, this situation would cause, in an uncertain and precarious way¸ the individuals being held responsible in a way not derived from their fault, for the liability that may arise as a result of the action or negligence of others. (E. 2014/144 and K. 2015/29 numbered decision).” 3 Pursuant to bis Article 35 paragraph 2 of the AATHUK, this Ar- ticle applies to the “ representatives of foreign individuals or institu- tions in Turkey. ” This Article should be understood in the way that the foreign legal entity manager is liable for the assets of the legal entity. In addition, no limit is stipulated for the liability of legal representa- tives or company executives for public debts. Conclusion As can be understood from the content of the study, the practices and decisions vary regarding the responsibility of the limited company managers, since the lawmaker did not make any explicit regulation, but referred to the provision concerning the joint stock companies and, as well, regulations exist both in the VUK and AATHUK. 3 Naklen, İnelli Ender , www.vergidegundem.com, 17 August 2018.