Tenant eviction for personal use in Türkiye operates under the Turkish Code of Obligations (Law No. 6098, the "TBK") of 11 January 2011, which entered into force on 1 July 2012 and replaced the prior Law on Real Estate Rentals (Law No. 6570). The principal provisions are: TBK Article 350 covering grounds arising from the landlord (personal use need and reconstruction); TBK Article 351 covering grounds arising from a new owner who acquired the property; TBK Article 352 covering grounds arising from the tenant (eviction undertaking, two justified warnings, alternative housing); TBK Article 353 addressing situations where the eviction grounds become moot during litigation; TBK Article 354 governing other lease termination grounds; and TBK Article 355 imposing a three-year prohibition on re-letting after a personal-use eviction with compensation consequences for breach.
Procedural framework operates through the Civil Procedure Code (Law No. 6100, the "HMK"), with the Civil Court of Peace (Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi) holding subject-matter jurisdiction for tenancy disputes under HMK Article 4. A critical recent reform: under Law No. 7445 of 28 March 2023 amending the Mediation in Civil Disputes Law (Law No. 6325, "HUAK") Article 18/B, mandatory mediation as a procedural prerequisite (dava şartı arabuluculuk) became applicable to lease disputes including eviction (tahliye) actions effective 1 September 2023. Filing an eviction lawsuit without first completing the mandatory mediation procedure triggers procedural dismissal under HMK Article 115. Rent cap regulations under TBK Article 344 amendments by Law No. 7409 of 8 June 2022 imposed a 25% annual increase cap on residential leases that operated through July 2024, materially affecting the rental landscape during the cap period. Enforcement of eviction judgments operates through Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (Law No. 2004, the "İİK") procedures including Article 269 specific eviction enforcement framework. ER&GUN&ER Law Firm advises Turkish and foreign landlords on personal-use eviction strategy, mandatory mediation compliance under HUAK 18/B, Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi litigation, enforcement proceedings, and post-eviction TBK Article 355 compliance. Practice may vary by authority and year — check current guidance.
TBK Article 350: Landlord-Caused Termination Grounds
TBK Article 350 establishes two distinct grounds for lease termination at the initiative of the landlord (kiraya verenden kaynaklanan sebepler): personal use need under Article 350(1) and reconstruction or major renovation under Article 350(2). Under Article 350(1), the landlord may terminate the lease and seek eviction where the property is required for residential or business use by: the landlord personally; the landlord's spouse; the landlord's descendants (children, grandchildren); the landlord's ascendants (parents, grandparents); or persons whom the landlord is legally obligated to provide care for under Civil Code (Law No. 4721, the "TMK") family law framework (typically siblings or other dependents under specific care obligations). The need must be genuine, sincere, and ongoing — not speculative or temporary.
The "genuine and sincere need" standard (gerçek ve samimi ihtiyaç) is interpreted strictly by the Turkish Court of Cassation (Yargıtay) in established jurisprudence. The need must exist at the time the lawsuit is filed and continue through the proceedings. Speculative future plans (such as "we may want to move there next year"), part-time use intentions, or transparently pretextual claims are insufficient. The landlord's burden of proof requires concrete evidence supporting the need: residency change documentation, family situation evidence (marriage, children of school age), employment relocation evidence, medical reports where health-related housing is needed, and similar substantive proofs. Where the landlord owns multiple properties, the burden extends to demonstrating why the specific subject property is needed rather than alternatives — though Yargıtay jurisprudence recognises landlord choice within reason where the choice is not abusive.
Under TBK Article 350(2), the landlord may terminate where the property requires reconstruction (yeniden inşa) or major renovation (esaslı onarım, genişletme veya değiştirme) that cannot proceed with the tenant in occupancy. This ground requires substantive demonstration of the construction/renovation plans through architectural projects, municipal building permit applications under Zoning Law (Law No. 3194), and engineering reports establishing that the work cannot proceed with the tenant in occupancy. Where the property falls within an Urban Transformation area under the Law on the Transformation of Areas Under Disaster Risk (Law No. 6306) of 16 May 2012, the Article 350(2) ground may be supported by Law 6306 risk assessment reports and reconstruction permits. The reconstruction ground also triggers TBK Article 355 obligations to permit the prior tenant first refusal to re-let after construction completion. Practice may vary by authority and year — check current guidance.
TBK Article 351: New Owner's Eviction Right
TBK Article 351 provides a separate eviction ground for new owners acquiring tenanted property. Under Article 351, a buyer who acquires the property through purchase, donation, inheritance, or other transfer mode can terminate the existing lease for the buyer's personal use needs (using the same TBK 350(1) categories — personal, spouse, descendants, ascendants, dependents). The procedural framework differs from the original landlord's TBK 350 path: the new owner must serve written notice to the tenant within one month of acquiring the property, declaring the termination and the qualifying need; and may file the eviction lawsuit either (i) six months after the notification period expires, or (ii) at the lease term end (in fixed-term leases) under specific timing rules.
The Article 351 framework is significant for property buyers acquiring tenanted properties for personal occupation. The one-month notification deadline is jurisdictional — failure to notify within one month of acquisition forfeits the Article 351 right, leaving the new owner with the same rights as the prior landlord (typically Article 350 personal use grounds available only at lease term end with longer notice periods). For acquisitions by foreign buyers, the timing planning is critical because the foreign buyer's awareness of the Article 351 deadline may be limited without local counsel. The new owner's "need" must satisfy the same genuine-and-sincere standard as Article 350(1), with the same evidentiary requirements regarding personal use. The acquisition documentation (title deed transfer, sale agreement, inheritance certificate, donation deed) supports the standing to invoke Article 351. Practice may vary by authority and year — check current guidance.
Strategic considerations for buyers contemplating Article 351 use begin before the acquisition. Pre-acquisition due diligence should establish the existing lease terms, the tenant identity and circumstances, and any factors that would complicate eviction. Where the buyer's needs are genuine and the timeline is critical, the buyer can structure the acquisition with this in mind: timing the closing to align with the desired notification window; coordinating the post-closing notification with proper notarial service; and managing any tenant-side communications professionally to preserve good faith. Where the buyer also wishes to pursue Article 350(2) reconstruction grounds (for example, where the property requires major renovation as part of the buyer's plans), Article 351 and Article 350(2) can sometimes be pursued in alternative or sequential strategies depending on the specific facts and timing.
TBK Article 352: Tenant-Caused Termination Grounds
TBK Article 352 establishes three grounds for lease termination based on tenant conduct or circumstances (kiracıdan kaynaklanan sebepler): TBK 352(1) eviction undertaking (tahliye taahhüdü); TBK 352(2) two justified warnings (iki haklı ihtar); and TBK 352(3) tenant or spouse owning suitable alternative housing in the same district. Each ground operates with distinct procedural requirements and evidentiary standards.
Under TBK 352(1), where the tenant has signed a written eviction undertaking dated after lease commencement specifying a date when the tenant will vacate, the landlord may file an eviction lawsuit within one month of the undertaken date. The undertaking must be in writing, signed by the tenant after the lease started (eviction undertakings signed before or simultaneously with the lease are invalid under Yargıtay jurisprudence to prevent landlord coercion at lease formation), and specify a definite vacation date. The Yargıtay scrutinises the timing strictly — undertakings signed under economic pressure or shortly after lease commencement may be invalidated. Under TBK 352(2), where the tenant has been validly warned twice (iki haklı ihtar) within one rental year for substantive lease breaches (typically rent payment defaults), the landlord may file an eviction lawsuit within one month following the lease year-end. The warnings must be properly notified through notary (noter), each warning must address a substantive breach, and they must occur within one rental year. Practice may vary by authority and year — check current guidance.
Under TBK 352(3), where the tenant or the tenant's spouse owns a residence within the same district (aynı ilçe veya belde) that is suitable for occupation, the landlord may seek eviction without specific notice timing constraints. The "suitable for occupation" standard requires substantive analysis — vacant lots, properties requiring extensive renovation, properties leased to others under valid agreements, or properties that the tenant uses for distinct purposes (such as a vacation home in another use class) typically do not satisfy the "suitable" standard. The landlord must produce land registry records (tapu kayıtları) and other evidence of the tenant's or spouse's ownership in the same district. Cases under Article 352(3) often involve fact-intensive disputes over whether the alternative property is genuinely suitable, with court-appointed expert reports (bilirkişi raporları) frequently determining the outcome. The strategic value of Article 352(3) for landlords lies in independence from the specific timing constraints of Article 350 — Article 352(3) actions can be filed without waiting for lease term-end timing in many circumstances.
Notice Form, Service, and Timing Requirements
Eviction notices and lawsuit timing follow specific rules that vary by lease type. For fixed-term leases (belirli süreli kira sözleşmeleri) under TBK Article 347, the lease ends at the contractual term unless either party serves termination notice; absent notice, the lease automatically renews for one year on the same terms. After ten years of automatic renewals, the landlord acquires an additional right to terminate without specific cause under TBK Article 347(2) (the "ten-year rule"), serving termination notice at least three months before the renewed lease year-end and filing the eviction lawsuit within one month after the year-end. For indefinite-term leases (belirsiz süreli kira sözleşmeleri) under TBK Article 329, the termination notice periods follow the rental payment period framework with specific minimum notice requirements.
For TBK Article 350 personal use eviction in fixed-term leases, the lawsuit must be filed within one month following the lease term-end without prior notice requirement (TBK 350 grounds are not preconditioned on advance notice during the term). However, where the landlord has not filed within the one-month window after the lease year-end, the eviction right for that lease year is forfeit and the landlord must wait for the next lease year-end. This jurisdictional one-month deadline is strictly enforced by Yargıtay, and missed deadlines have caused landlords to lose otherwise meritorious claims. For TBK Article 350 in indefinite-term leases, advance notice through the indefinite-term termination framework under TBK Article 329 is required, with the eviction lawsuit filed after the notice period expires. Practice may vary by authority and year — check current guidance.
Notice form for eviction-related communications should follow the notarial channel (noter ihtarnamesi) in most cases, providing official date-certain delivery and uncontestable record. While other documented service methods (return-receipt mail, electronic notification under specific Communiqué frameworks) can satisfy procedural requirements, notarial service through a Turkish notary provides the strongest evidentiary record and is the standard practice. The notice should clearly identify the lease, the parties, the legal basis for termination (specific TBK article), and any relevant deadline. For foreign landlords, notarial service can be coordinated through power of attorney (vekaletname) under TBK Articles 502-514 with apostille legalisation under the Hague Apostille Convention 1961 (Türkiye party since 1985 through Law No. 6303), allowing Turkish counsel to issue notices and manage subsequent litigation without the foreign landlord's physical presence in Türkiye.
Mandatory Mediation Under HUAK Article 18/B
A critical recent reform fundamentally affecting tenant eviction practice: under Law No. 7445 of 28 March 2023, the Mediation in Civil Disputes Law (Law No. 6325, the "HUAK") Article 18/B was amended to add lease disputes (kira ilişkisinden kaynaklanan uyuşmazlıklar) to the categories subject to mandatory mediation as a procedural prerequisite (dava şartı arabuluculuk). Effective 1 September 2023, eviction lawsuits, rent collection disputes, and other lease-related civil claims must complete mandatory mediation before filing in the Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi. Filing without prior mediation completion triggers procedural dismissal under HMK Article 115 — making mediation completion a non-waivable jurisdictional precondition.
The mandatory mediation procedure operates through licensed mediators (arabulucu) registered with the Ministry of Justice's Mediation Department. The applicant landlord files an application through the Mediation Department's electronic system (Arabuluculuk Daire Başkanlığı), which assigns a mediator from the panel; the mediator schedules the initial meeting within specified timeframes; the parties (or their authorised representatives) attend; and the mediator issues a final report (son tutanak) recording either successful settlement or unsuccessful conclusion. The mediation must be completed within the statutory periods (typically 3 weeks with potential 1-week extension for complex cases under HUAK framework). Where the mediation results in settlement, the settlement document has the force of a judicial decision under HUAK Article 18/A. Where the mediation concludes without settlement, the final report enables the landlord to file the eviction lawsuit, with the report attached as evidence of mediation completion. Practice may vary by authority and year — check current guidance.
Strategic considerations for landlords navigating mandatory mediation include several practical elements. The mediation typically resolves a substantial percentage of disputes through negotiated settlement, often involving extended vacation timelines, settlement payments, or modified terms — outcomes that may be preferable to multi-year litigation despite involving compromise. Where settlement is unlikely (clear personal use need with uncooperative tenant), the mediation can still serve to establish the landlord's good-faith posture, document the eviction grounds for subsequent litigation, and obtain the procedural prerequisite for court filing. Costs of mediation are modest (typically borne by the parties under HUAK framework), and the timeline is rapid compared to litigation. For foreign landlords, mediation participation through Turkish counsel under power of attorney is permitted, allowing efficient management without travel requirements. The pre-mediation strategy should mirror the litigation strategy — clear documentation, proper notices, and substantive evidence — because the mediation often previews how the dispute would proceed in court.
Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi: Litigation Procedure
Eviction lawsuits proceed before the Civil Court of Peace (Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi) under HMK Article 4 subject-matter jurisdiction for tenancy disputes. The petition (dava dilekçesi) must include: the parties' identification; the legal basis for eviction (specific TBK article cited); the factual basis (lease details, notice service, eviction grounds with supporting evidence); the relief sought (eviction order with specific timeline); and the documentary evidence references. Required attachments typically include: the lease agreement; title deed (tapu) showing landlord ownership; the notarised eviction notice (where applicable); evidence of personal need (residency change documents, family certificates, medical reports as relevant); land registry records of any other landlord-owned properties (where Article 350(1) requires the choice justification); and the Mediation Department's final report evidencing completed mandatory mediation under HUAK 18/B.
The Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi process operates through preliminary examination (ön inceleme) under HMK Articles 137-142 establishing the legal and factual issues; primary examination (tahkikat) under HMK Articles 143-200 receiving evidence and conducting hearings; and judgment (karar) following deliberation. Documentary evidence under HMK Article 199 is the principal evidentiary mode in eviction cases, supplemented by witness testimony where factual disputes warrant and expert reports (bilirkişi) under HMK Articles 266-287 for technical matters such as alternative property suitability under Article 352(3) or reconstruction necessity under Article 350(2). The court may order site visits (keşif) under HMK Articles 288-292 where physical inspection of the property is needed. Practice may vary by authority and year — check current guidance.
Strategic litigation management involves several considerations beyond the substantive eviction grounds. Documentary evidence should be filed comprehensively at the outset to establish the strongest first impression with the court. Witness lists should focus on factual elements that genuinely affect the eviction grounds rather than character witnesses or peripheral testimony. Expert report requests should be coordinated with substantive grounds — for example, where Article 352(3) suitable alternative housing is contested, expert assessment of the alternative property's habitability and suitability becomes decisive. Tenant defenses (typically including pretextual claim allegations, alternative property availability, hardship considerations, and procedural challenges) should be anticipated and addressed proactively in the initial petition where possible, rather than reactively in subsequent submissions. The total Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi process timeline varies by court workload and case complexity, with case-specific factors significantly affecting timing.
Court Decision and Enforcement Under İİK
A favourable judgment in the eviction lawsuit orders the tenant to vacate the property within a specified period, typically 15 to 30 days after the judgment becomes final. Tenant appeal rights under HMK Article 341 (istinaf to Bölge Adliye Mahkemesi within two weeks for fixed-term lease disputes) and subsequent temyiz to Yargıtay under HMK Article 361 frameworks (subject to monetary thresholds) suspend enforcement unless the court has ordered immediate enforcement under HMK Article 350. Strategic timing of istinaf and temyiz applications by the tenant can extend the proceedings substantially, but the substantive merits ultimately determine the final outcome.
Enforcement of the eviction judgment operates through the Enforcement Office (İcra Dairesi) under Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (Law No. 2004, the "İİK"). Specific tenant eviction enforcement proceeds under İİK Article 269 (rent and eviction-specific procedures) and the general enforcement framework. The landlord's counsel files an enforcement application with the appropriate İcra Dairesi presenting the judgment; the İcra Dairesi issues an enforcement order (icra emri) with a vacation deadline; if the tenant fails to vacate by the deadline, the enforcement officer (icra memuru) physically conducts the eviction with police accompaniment if necessary, locksmith attendance if the tenant refuses access, and movable property inventory if items are left in the property. Practice may vary by authority and year — check current guidance.
Enforcement complications can arise where: the tenant disputes the enforcement on procedural grounds (typically through İİK Article 16 complaints or İİK Article 169 declaratory actions); the property has been subleased to third parties whose rights require separate analysis; the tenant has died with heirs assuming legal status; or the property contains substantial movable property requiring storage and disposition arrangements. The landlord's counsel coordinates with the İcra Dairesi, locksmith services, security companies as appropriate, and the police where required. Throughout enforcement, the goal is lawful and orderly recovery of the property — actions that exceed the judgment's scope or that unlawfully damage the tenant's property can create separate liability under TBK general framework. The completion of physical eviction is recorded by the enforcement officer in the eviction minutes (tahliye tutanağı), establishing the moment of recovery for TBK Article 355 three-year period purposes (discussed below).
TBK Article 355: Three-Year Re-Letting Prohibition
TBK Article 355 imposes substantial post-eviction obligations on landlords who succeed in personal-use evictions under TBK Article 350(1) or new-owner evictions under TBK Article 351. The landlord must use the property for the personal need that justified the eviction, or for the qualifying family member, for at least three years (üç yıl) following the eviction. Re-letting the property to a third party (anyone other than the qualifying family member identified in the original eviction grounds) within the three-year prohibition period triggers compensation liability to the evicted tenant. Selling the property within the three-year period to an unrelated buyer who then re-lets the property similarly raises compensation exposure for the original landlord, with specific factual analysis required.
The compensation amount under TBK Article 355 is at least one year's rent at the previous lease's rate (son kira yılında ödenmiş olan bir yıllık kira bedeli), serving as both deterrent and remedy. The evicted tenant's claim is filed before the Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi as a separate compensation lawsuit, with one-year statute of limitations under specific TBK provisions running from the tenant's awareness of the violation. The tenant's burden requires demonstrating: the landlord's eviction on TBK 350(1) or 351 personal use grounds; the violation through prohibited re-letting or transfer to non-qualifying use within three years; and the resulting compensation amount. Defences for the landlord include: justified reasons for not maintaining the personal use (such as unforeseen family circumstances, employment relocation, or other genuine changes); the use being by a qualifying family member who was identified or contemplated in the original grounds; or the substitute use being for the same eviction purpose as originally claimed. Practice may vary by authority and year — check current guidance.
Strategic compliance with TBK Article 355 requires deliberate post-eviction documentation. Landlords should document their actual occupation of the property (utility account transfers, address registration with the Civil Registry under Population Services Law (Law No. 5490) Article 50, council tax records, neighbour observations) to establish the personal use defence against future tenant compensation claims. Where the qualifying family member occupies, similar documentation evidences the family member's residence. Where the personal use plan changes during the three-year period due to genuine reasons, documentation of the change reasons (employment relocation orders, family situation changes, medical circumstances) supports the justified-reason defence. For landlords contemplating sale within the three-year window, the sale should be documented with market-rate transfer to an unrelated buyer, with the purpose of the sale clearly distinguishable from circumvention of the eviction grounds. ER&GUN&ER Law Firm advises landlords on post-eviction compliance documentation and defends against tenant compensation claims under TBK Article 355.
Rent Cap Regulations Under TBK Article 344 and Law 7409
Recent rent regulation has significantly affected the Turkish tenancy landscape. Under TBK Article 344 standard framework, annual rent increases are determined by reference to the Twelve-Month Producer Price Index (Üretici Fiyat Endeksi, "ÜFE") published by the Turkish Statistical Institute (TÜİK), with the rent increase capped at the ÜFE rate. However, Law No. 7409 of 8 June 2022 introduced an exceptional cap: residential lease rent increases were limited to 25% per year regardless of the ÜFE rate, with the cap initially applicable from June 2022 to July 2023, extended through subsequent regulations to July 2024 (with eventual return to standard ÜFE-based framework). The cap applied to existing tenancies subject to renewal during the cap period, materially constraining landlords' ability to adjust rents during high-inflation periods.
The interaction between rent cap regulations and personal-use eviction strategy was significant during the cap period. Some landlords used personal-use eviction as a mechanism to recover properties where rent cap-suppressed rates substantially diverged from market rates, allowing the landlord to either occupy personally or to subsequently re-let at market rates after the three-year TBK 355 period. Yargıtay jurisprudence developed substantively during this period, with courts scrutinising personal-use claims more carefully where the apparent economic motivation could be identified — particularly in cases where the post-eviction conduct suggested investment rather than residential motivation. The "genuine and sincere need" standard under TBK 350(1) interacted with rent cap economic pressures to produce nuanced fact-intensive analysis. Practice may vary by authority and year — check current guidance.
Post-cap period considerations remain relevant for current tenancy planning. Leases that ran during the cap period may carry artificially-suppressed rates that diverge from current market rates, with the gap widening through cumulative cap effects. Landlords assessing personal-use eviction strategy should distinguish between genuine personal needs (which remain valid grounds regardless of economic rate gaps) and economically-motivated strategies (which face heightened scrutiny under Yargıtay jurisprudence). Where the legitimate personal need exists, the rate gap is incidental and does not undermine the eviction grounds. Where the underlying motivation is principally economic, alternative paths (mutual lease modification under TBK Article 344 negotiation, rent determination action (kira tespit davası) under TBK Article 345, or mutual termination by agreement) may be more appropriate than pretextual personal-use claims that face Yargıtay rejection.
Burden of Proof and Yargıtay Jurisprudence
The burden of proof in personal-use eviction lies with the landlord under HMK Article 190 (the party asserting must prove). The standard requires demonstration that the personal use need is genuine, sincere, and ongoing (gerçek, samimi ve devamlı) at the time of the lawsuit. Yargıtay's specialised tenancy chamber (historically the 6th Civil Chamber, now restructured) has developed substantial jurisprudence on the burden, with key principles including: the need must exist when the lawsuit is filed, not merely when the lease was originally granted; speculative or contingent future plans are insufficient; the choice of subject property over alternatives must be reasonable but is generally respected; family member needs must be properly documented with the family relationship and the qualifying need both established; and the timing of the eviction filing must be substantive rather than abusive.
Established Yargıtay positions on common factual scenarios include: landlord moving back to Türkiye from abroad — strong grounds when supported by relocation documentation, family situation, and timeline; landlord's child needing housing for university or marriage — strong grounds with educational enrolment, marriage records, and family circumstance evidence; landlord needing the property for medical reasons or care of an elderly parent — strong grounds with medical reports and care arrangements; landlord's economic need to recover the property for higher-yield use without genuine personal occupation — generally rejected as pretextual; landlord owning multiple alternative properties — fact-intensive analysis with the burden to justify the specific property choice; and landlord seeking eviction shortly after acquiring the property without preceding personal need indicia — analysed under TBK Article 351 framework with one-month notification requirement. Practice may vary by authority and year — check current guidance.
Strategic case preparation following Yargıtay jurisprudence patterns involves documenting the personal need's specific dimensions through multiple evidence categories: factual basis (the underlying personal/family circumstance); timing basis (why the property is needed now rather than earlier or later); locational basis (why this specific property suits the need); functional basis (what use the property will support — residence, business, family); and substantive plans (concrete steps showing the need's transition into actual use after eviction). For foreign landlords, the documentation may include foreign residency change records, foreign employment termination evidence, repatriation plans, and similar cross-border indicators that support the genuine need narrative. Witness testimony from family members, neighbours, or other parties with personal knowledge can supplement documentary evidence. Expert reports may support technical aspects (medical, occupational, family welfare) where relevant.
Foreign Landlord Considerations
Foreign nationals owning Turkish property face specific procedural considerations in personal-use eviction. Foreign ownership of Turkish real estate operates under the Land Registry Law (Law No. 2644) framework and the Foreign Property Acquisition Regulation, with specific reciprocity-based rules determining permissible acquisition. Once owned, the foreign landlord enjoys the same substantive eviction rights as Turkish landlords under TBK Articles 350-355, with the procedural pathways operating identically through the Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi and İcra Dairesi. The principal procedural challenge for foreign landlords is the practical management of notice service, mediation participation, litigation, and enforcement from abroad.
Power of attorney (vekaletname) under TBK Articles 502-514 enables Turkish counsel to handle the entire eviction process on the foreign landlord's behalf. The vekaletname must be: executed before a Turkish notary if the landlord is in Türkiye, or before a Turkish consulate abroad, or before a foreign notary with apostille legalisation under the Hague Apostille Convention 1961 (Türkiye party since 1985 through Law No. 6303); translated into Turkish under HMK Article 223 by sworn translators registered with Turkish notaries where executed in a foreign language; and specific in scope (authorising eviction lawsuits, enforcement proceedings, mediation participation, settlement authority within specified parameters). The vekaletname enables Turkish counsel to file lawsuits, attend hearings, conduct mediation, manage enforcement, and execute settlements without the foreign landlord's physical presence in Türkiye. Practice may vary by authority and year — check current guidance.
Documentation of personal need from abroad requires deliberate planning. Where the foreign landlord plans to move to Türkiye for personal occupation, residency permit applications under Foreigners and International Protection Law (Law No. 6458) should be initiated in parallel with the eviction process, with the residence permit issuance supporting the genuine relocation intention. Where the personal use is for a family member residing in Türkiye, the family member's circumstances should be documented through family registry records, employment or educational status, and current housing situation. Where business use is the basis, business registration steps under TTK framework, professional licensing where required, and physical office requirements should be documented. The cross-border documentation requires coordination between Turkish counsel managing the eviction litigation and any home-country counsel managing the broader relocation or family support framework. ER&GUN&ER Law Firm advises foreign landlords on coordinated personal-use eviction strategy with attention to the specific cross-border evidentiary and procedural challenges.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What law governs tenant eviction in Türkiye? The Turkish Code of Obligations (Law No. 6098, the "TBK") of 11 January 2011, which entered into force on 1 July 2012. Eviction grounds are in TBK Articles 350-355 (replacing the prior Law No. 6570 framework).
- What is TBK Article 350? The principal personal-use eviction provision. Article 350(1) covers landlord/family personal use need; Article 350(2) covers reconstruction or major renovation. The need must be genuine, sincere, and ongoing.
- Who counts as qualifying family for personal use? Under TBK 350(1): the landlord, spouse, descendants (children, grandchildren), ascendants (parents, grandparents), and persons the landlord is legally obligated to provide care for under Civil Code (Law No. 4721) family law framework.
- Is mandatory mediation required? Yes. Under Law No. 7445 of 28 March 2023 amending HUAK Article 18/B, lease disputes including eviction (tahliye) actions require mandatory mediation as procedural prerequisite effective 1 September 2023. Filing without mediation triggers procedural dismissal under HMK Article 115.
- What is the new owner's eviction right? Under TBK Article 351, a buyer may evict for personal use by serving written notice within one month of acquisition; lawsuit can be filed six months after notification or at lease term-end depending on lease type.
- What other tenant-side grounds exist? TBK 352(1) eviction undertaking signed after lease commencement; TBK 352(2) two justified warnings within one rental year; TBK 352(3) tenant or spouse owning suitable alternative housing in same district.
- What court has jurisdiction? Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi (Civil Court of Peace) under HMK Article 4 subject-matter jurisdiction for tenancy disputes. Appeals proceed to Bölge Adliye Mahkemesi (istinaf) and Yargıtay (temyiz) under monetary thresholds.
- What is the three-year prohibition? Under TBK Article 355, after personal-use eviction the landlord must use the property for the eviction purpose for at least three years. Re-letting to others within three years triggers compensation liability of at least one year's rent at the prior lease rate.
- Can the lawsuit be filed without prior notice in fixed-term leases? For TBK 350 personal use in fixed-term leases, the lawsuit must be filed within one month after the lease term-end without separate prior notice requirement. The one-month deadline is jurisdictional. For indefinite-term leases, advance notice through TBK Article 329 framework is required.
- What about rent cap regulations? Law No. 7409 of 8 June 2022 introduced 25% annual cap on residential rent increases (June 2022-July 2024), exceptional to the standard ÜFE-based TBK Article 344 framework. The cap period has ended; standard framework applies post-cap with ÜFE indexation.
- How is enforcement conducted? Through the Enforcement Office (İcra Dairesi) under Law No. 2004 (İİK), particularly Article 269 for tenancy. Process includes enforcement order with vacation deadline, physical eviction by enforcement officer with police accompaniment if necessary, locksmith services if needed, and movable property inventory.
- Can foreign landlords pursue eviction? Yes. Foreign landlords have the same substantive eviction rights as Turkish landlords under TBK Articles 350-355. Practical management through Turkish counsel under power of attorney (vekaletname) under TBK Articles 502-514 with apostille legalisation under Hague Convention 1961 (Law No. 6303).
- What documents are needed? Lease agreement, title deed (tapu), notarised eviction notice (where applicable), evidence of personal need (residency change, family certificates, medical reports as relevant), land registry records of any other landlord-owned properties, and Mediation Department's final report under HUAK 18/B.
- What happens if tenant appeals? Tenant appeal rights under HMK include istinaf to Bölge Adliye Mahkemesi within two weeks; subsequent temyiz to Yargıtay subject to monetary thresholds. Appeals suspend enforcement unless court ordered immediate enforcement under HMK Article 350.
- Where does ER&GUN&ER Law Firm support tenant eviction matters? TBK Article 350-352 personal-use, new-owner, and tenant-caused eviction strategy; mandatory mediation under HUAK Article 18/B; Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi litigation and HMK procedure; Bölge Adliye Mahkemesi and Yargıtay appeals; İcra Dairesi enforcement under İİK Article 269; TBK Article 355 post-eviction compliance and defence against tenant compensation claims; rent cap analysis under TBK Article 344 and Law 7409; foreign landlord vekaletname-based representation; and rent determination actions under TBK Article 345.
Author: Mirkan Topcu is an attorney registered with the Istanbul Bar Association (Istanbul 1st Bar), Bar Registration No: 67874. His practice focuses on cross-border and high-stakes matters where evidence discipline, procedural accuracy, and risk control are decisive.
He advises Turkish and foreign landlords, real estate investors, family offices, and inheritance beneficiaries across TBK Articles 350-355 Eviction Strategy, HUAK Article 18/B Mandatory Mediation, Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi Litigation under HMK Article 4, Bölge Adliye Mahkemesi and Yargıtay Appeals, İcra Dairesi Enforcement under İİK Article 269, TBK Article 355 Three-Year Compliance and Compensation Defence, Rent Cap Analysis under TBK Article 344 and Law 7409, Rent Determination Actions under TBK Article 345, Vekaletname-Based Foreign Landlord Representation under TBK Articles 502-514, and Hague Apostille Convention 1961 documentation under Law No. 6303.
Education: Istanbul University Faculty of Law (2018); Galatasaray University, LL.M. (2022). LinkedIn: Profile. Istanbul Bar Association: Official website.