New Property Owner’s Right to Evict a Tenant in Turkey

Purchasing an apartment, house, office or commercial property occupied by a tenant does not automatically give the new owner the right to obtain immediate possession. Turkish rental law protects the continuity of existing rental agreements and requires the purchaser to comply with specific substantive and procedural conditions before an eviction judgment may be obtained.

The general rule is that a change of ownership does not terminate the rental agreement. Under Article 310 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098, a person who acquires rented property becomes a party to the existing rental agreement by operation of law. The tenant therefore continues to occupy the property under the existing lease, while the purchaser assumes the legal position of the former landlord.

However, Turkish law recognises that a person may purchase property because it is genuinely required as a home or workplace. Article 351 of the Turkish Code of Obligations provides the new owner with a special eviction right where the property must be used by the new owner, the new owner’s spouse, descendants, ascendants or another person whom the new owner is legally obliged to support.

This right is not unconditional. The new owner must establish a genuine and compulsory housing or workplace need and must comply with the statutory notice and filing periods. Depending on the selected procedure, the owner may either notify the tenant within one month following acquisition and file an eviction lawsuit after six months, or wait until the end of the existing contractual period and file the action within the legally prescribed period.

Since 1 September 2023, mandatory mediation must also generally be completed before a court action arising from a rental relationship is filed. A purchaser who ignores this requirement may face procedural dismissal even if the need is otherwise genuine.

This guide explains the new property owner’s right to evict a tenant in Turkey, the meaning of genuine need, the one-month notification requirement, the six-month waiting period, mandatory mediation, evidence, court proceedings and the consequences of re-letting the property after eviction.

Does the Sale of a Rented Property Terminate the Lease?

The sale of a rented property does not ordinarily terminate the rental agreement.

The purchaser automatically replaces the former owner as landlord. It is not necessary for the tenant and purchaser to sign a new rental agreement for this statutory transfer to occur. The purchaser acquires the rights arising from the lease but also becomes responsible for the landlord’s obligations.

Accordingly, the existing lease normally continues with the same:

• Commencement date;
• Renewal date;
• Rental amount;
• Lawful increase mechanism;
• Permitted purpose of use;
• Security arrangements; and
• Tenant protections.

The new owner cannot declare that the previous agreement is invalid merely because ownership has changed. Nor can the purchaser unilaterally impose a new rental period, a substantially higher rent or an immediate evacuation obligation.

The seller’s promise to deliver the property vacant also does not automatically bind the tenant. If the seller promises vacant possession without having obtained a binding tenant agreement or enforceable eviction right, the purchaser may have contractual claims against the seller. However, that promise alone does not remove the tenant’s rights under the existing lease. The continuation of the tenancy follows from Article 310 of the Turkish Code of Obligations.

Legal Basis of the New Owner’s Eviction Right

The special right of the purchaser is regulated by Article 351 of the Turkish Code of Obligations.

A person who acquires rented property may seek termination if the property must be used as a residence or workplace by:

• The new owner;
• The new owner’s spouse;
• The new owner’s descendants;
• The new owner’s ascendants; or
• Another person whom the new owner is legally required to support.

The provision grants the new owner two procedural alternatives.

Under the first alternative, the purchaser must notify the tenant in writing within one month following acquisition. After six months have passed from the acquisition date, the purchaser may file an eviction lawsuit.

Under the second alternative, the new owner may wait until the end of the existing contractual rental period and exercise the right through a lawsuit filed within one month following the end of that period.

The two alternatives must be distinguished carefully. The first route is particularly useful when a long period remains before the contractual renewal date. The second route may be more practical where the contractual period will expire shortly after the acquisition.

Who Is Considered a New Owner?

Article 351 refers to a person who subsequently acquires the rented property. The provision is not limited solely to an ordinary sale.

Depending on the circumstances, acquisition may occur through:

• Purchase;
• Donation;
• Exchange;
• Court-ordered sale;
• Enforcement sale; or
• Another transaction transferring ownership after the rental agreement was established.

The date on which ownership is legally acquired is essential because the one-month notice period and six-month waiting period are calculated from the acquisition date.

For registered immovable property, the title deed registration date will usually be the decisive date. The date on which the purchase price was paid, the preliminary contract was signed or the keys were delivered to the purchaser will not necessarily replace the title registration date.

Transactions involving inheritance, corporate restructuring, joint ownership or acquisition of only a share in the property may require a more detailed assessment of party status and the right to bring the action.

Purchasing the Property Is Not Sufficient by Itself

A purchaser cannot obtain eviction merely by presenting the title deed.

The new owner must prove a need that is genuine, sincere and compulsory. Established Court of Cassation practice requires the need to exist when the lawsuit is filed and to continue during the proceedings. Temporary needs, speculative plans and needs that may arise only in the distant future are generally insufficient.

The court examines whether the stated purpose reflects the purchaser’s actual intention. Relevant circumstances may include the purchaser’s current residence, employment, family circumstances, other available properties, health needs and statements made before or after the acquisition.

A person may lawfully purchase property as an investment. However, investment ownership alone does not create a need-based eviction right.

Similarly, the following circumstances are not independent statutory grounds for eviction:

• The tenant pays below current market rent;
• The purchaser paid a high price for the property;
• The purchaser wants a different tenant;
• The purchaser wishes to sell the property again;
• The purchaser disagrees with the existing tenant; or
• The tenant refuses an unlawful rent increase.

A rent-value dispute must ordinarily be addressed through the statutory annual increase and rent-determination procedures rather than an artificial claim of personal need.

What Is a Genuine Housing Need?

A housing need exists where the property is genuinely required for regular residential use by one of the persons protected under Article 351.

Examples that may support a housing need include the new owner currently living in rented accommodation, having to leave the current residence, relocating for employment or requiring a more suitable property because of health, accessibility or family circumstances.

The need of a child may also justify eviction. A son or daughter may require an independent home because of marriage, employment, education or the establishment of a separate household.

Likewise, the housing need of the purchaser’s parents or other protected ascendants may support the claim where the circumstances demonstrate a serious and concrete requirement.

The claimant does not necessarily have to be homeless. However, the court will examine whether the intended use is real and whether eviction of the existing tenant is reasonably necessary.

A desire to move into a more prestigious or more valuable property may not be enough without an objective and credible explanation. By contrast, health requirements, employment location, family size or unsuitable existing living conditions may support the compulsory nature of the need.

What Is a Genuine Workplace Need?

The new owner may also seek eviction where the property is required as a workplace.

The purchaser should establish the business or professional activity that will be conducted in the property and explain why the premises are suitable and necessary for that activity.

Relevant evidence may include:

• Trade registry documents;
• Tax registration;
• Professional licences;
• A current workplace lease;
• Termination of the existing workplace lease;
• Business plans;
• Company resolutions;
• Permit applications;
• Equipment purchases; and
• Architectural or technical information.

A vague statement that the purchaser may establish a business in the future will not carry the same evidentiary value as a concrete and imminent project.

The property must also be legally and technically suitable for the intended use. For example, a purchaser claiming that an apartment will be used as a clinic, restaurant or another regulated business may need to demonstrate compliance with zoning, condominium, licensing and safety requirements.

The courts examine not only whether the purchaser wishes to conduct an activity but also whether the stated business need is genuine, continuing and compatible with the property.

Can a Company Rely on Article 351?

A legal entity may acquire rented property and, in appropriate circumstances, rely on a genuine workplace need belonging to that legal entity.

A company may require the premises for its own office, branch, warehouse, production facility or another activity falling within its corporate purpose.

However, a company cannot ordinarily have a personal residential need in the same manner as an individual. The housing need of a shareholder, director or employee should not automatically be treated as the company’s own need.

Similarly, where an individual purchases property, the workplace need of a separate company in which that individual is a shareholder may not automatically constitute the individual purchaser’s personal workplace need. Turkish judicial practice respects the separate legal personality of commercial companies when evaluating these claims.

Corporate ownership and intended business use should therefore be structured and documented carefully before a need-based eviction case is filed.

The One-Month Written Notification Requirement

A purchaser who wishes to use the special six-month route must notify the tenant in writing within one month following acquisition.

This requirement is one of the most critical elements of the procedure. Failure to complete a valid written notification within the one-month period prevents the purchaser from relying on the special six-month mechanism.

The notification should clearly identify:

• The new owner;
• The acquisition date;
• The rented property;
• The existing tenant;
• The person whose need is relied upon;
• Whether the need concerns residential or workplace use; and
• The purchaser’s intention to terminate the lease under Article 351.

A notarial notice is generally advisable because it provides reliable proof of the content, date and service.

Court of Cassation practice treats the one-month notification requirement strictly. It is not sufficient merely to prepare or send the notice within the period; the notification must reach the tenant within the statutory period. The Court of Cassation’s 3rd Civil Chamber has emphasised the importance of timely notification in its decision numbered E. 2017/3079, K. 2017/7359.

The purchaser should therefore not wait until the last day of the one-month period to initiate service.

Is It Enough to Inform the Tenant That the Property Was Purchased?

No. A notice stating only that ownership has changed may not be sufficient for the need-based eviction procedure.

The purpose of the notice under Article 351 is not merely to inform the tenant of the new payment recipient. It must also inform the tenant of the new owner’s housing or workplace need and the intention to use the statutory termination right.

A separate ownership notification may be adequate for redirecting rent payments but inadequate for preserving the special six-month eviction route.

The notice should therefore state the legal and factual basis of the need with sufficient clarity.

If several persons are identified as tenants, the notice should be served on every contractual tenant whose rights will be affected by the requested eviction.

What Does the Six-Month Period Mean?

The six-month period is often misunderstood.

It does not mean that the tenant must automatically leave six months after the sale. Nor does it mean that the purchaser may personally take possession when the period expires.

The six-month period is a statutory waiting period before the new owner may file the need-based eviction lawsuit under the first route of Article 351.

During the six-month period:

• The rental agreement continues;
• The tenant must continue paying rent;
• The tenant may continue using the property;
• The purchaser must comply with the landlord’s obligations; and
• The purchaser cannot use force to obtain possession.

If the tenant does not leave voluntarily, the new owner must complete mandatory mediation and obtain a court judgment.

According to Court of Cassation practice, the action does not necessarily have to be filed immediately on the first day following the six-month waiting period. Nevertheless, all procedural dates must be calculated carefully according to the acquisition date, rental period and applicable case law.

Example of the One-Month and Six-Month Procedure

Assume that a tenanted apartment is transferred to the purchaser on 15 July 2026.

The purchaser wishes to use the apartment as a permanent residence.

To rely on the special Article 351 route, the new owner must ensure that the written need notification reaches the tenant within one month from 15 July 2026.

The six-month waiting period is then calculated from the acquisition date. The purchaser may commence the lawsuit route after six months have passed, subject to completion of mandatory mediation.

The tenant does not automatically become an unlawful occupant at the end of the six months. The existing rental relationship continues until a valid settlement, voluntary surrender or enforceable judicial decision terminates possession.

The Contractual Expiry Alternative

Article 351 also gives the new owner an alternative to the one-month notice and six-month waiting route.

The purchaser may exercise the need-based termination right by filing a lawsuit within one month following the end of the existing contractual rental period.

This alternative may be advantageous where the rental period will expire before the six-month waiting period or where the purchaser missed the special one-month acquisition notice.

For example, assume that a rental period ends on 30 September and the property is acquired on 1 August. Instead of relying on the six-month procedure, the purchaser may evaluate the contractual-expiry route and file the need-based action within one month following the end of the rental period.

The purchaser must still prove a genuine and compulsory need. Waiting for the contractual period does not remove the substantive proof requirement.

Is an Acquisition Notice Required for the Contractual Expiry Route?

The second paragraph of Article 351 provides a separate alternative based on the end of the contractual period.

The statutory one-month acquisition notice is specifically connected with the first route, under which the action is filed after the six-month waiting period.

A purchaser relying on the contractual-expiry route should nevertheless send a properly drafted notice whenever possible. Written notice may reduce factual disputes, demonstrate the sincerity of the need and assist in managing mandatory mediation and litigation deadlines.

The absence of the special acquisition notice does not necessarily eliminate the second route, but the action must be filed within the relevant period following the end of the lease term.

What If the Lease Is for an Indefinite Period?

Article 351 is most commonly applied to fixed-term residential and roofed workplace leases. Where the existing rental agreement is indefinite, the general termination periods, commencement date and structure of the rental relationship must be examined together with the new owner’s special rights.

An indefinite-term classification should not be assumed merely because the original written agreement has expired. Residential and roofed workplace leases frequently continue through statutory one-year extensions rather than automatically becoming ordinary indefinite leases.

The original contract, commencement date and all renewal protocols should therefore be reviewed before the new owner selects the procedural route.

Mandatory Mediation Before the Lawsuit

Since 1 September 2023, disputes arising from rental relationships are generally subject to mandatory mediation before litigation.

Article 18/B of the Mediation Law requires mediation for rental disputes, except for the specific non-judicial eviction procedures regulated by the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law. A new-owner need-based eviction action is therefore subject to mandatory mediation.

The mediation application should clearly identify:

• The purchaser;
• The tenant;
• The rented property;
• The acquisition date;
• The existing rental agreement;
• The written notification;
• The person whose need is relied upon;
• The requested evacuation date; and
• Related issues such as rent, deposit and key delivery.

If the parties reach an agreement, they may establish an exact evacuation date and regulate financial and practical matters.

If no agreement is reached, the mediator prepares a final report. This report must be submitted or properly referenced when the lawsuit is filed.

A lawsuit filed without completing mandatory mediation is vulnerable to procedural dismissal.

Settlement Options During Mediation

Mediation may provide a more predictable result than a contested eviction case.

The parties may agree on:

• A reasonable relocation period;
• An exact key-delivery date;
• Continuation of rent payments;
• Return of the security deposit;
• Moving expenses;
• Property inspection;
• Utility and building charges;
• Repair obligations; and
• Release of further claims.

The evacuation date should be written as a definite calendar date.

Statements such as “the tenant will leave when another apartment is found” should be avoided because they may create enforcement uncertainty.

The settlement should also explain whether the tenant will continue paying contractual rent or another agreed occupation amount until actual handover.

Which Court Has Jurisdiction?

The Civil Court of Peace, known in Turkish as the Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi, has subject-matter jurisdiction over disputes arising from rental relationships, regardless of the monetary value of the case.

Article 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure assigns rental disputes, including eviction lawsuits, to the Civil Courts of Peace, except for the specific non-judicial eviction procedures under the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law.

Territorial jurisdiction is determined according to the procedural rules concerning the defendant’s residence, the place of contractual performance and any valid jurisdiction arrangement.

The purchaser should normally submit:

• The title deed;
• Acquisition records;
• The original rental agreement;
• All renewal protocols;
• The Article 351 notice;
• Proof of service;
• The mediation final report;
• Evidence supporting the need; and
• Records concerning other properties and current residence.

Burden of Proof

The new owner bears the burden of proving the factual conditions supporting the eviction request.

A timely notice and completed six-month period are not enough by themselves. The claimant must also prove that the housing or workplace need is genuine, sincere and compulsory.

The tenant may challenge the claim by presenting evidence that:

• Another suitable property is vacant;
• The purchaser does not intend to use the premises;
• The property is advertised for sale or rent;
• The proposed business cannot legally operate in the property;
• The intended user lives permanently elsewhere;
• The need depends on an uncertain event;
• The purchaser previously demanded an excessive rent; or
• The claimed need disappeared during the proceedings.

The court evaluates the parties’ evidence as a whole. A need that existed on the filing date but disappears during the trial may no longer justify eviction because the need must continue throughout the proceedings.

Evidence of a Residential Need

Evidence supporting a residential need may include:

• The purchaser’s current rental agreement;
• Bank records proving current rent payments;
• Address-registration documents;
• Family registry records;
• Marriage preparations;
• Employment relocation documents;
• School or university records;
• Medical and accessibility reports;
• Notices requiring the purchaser to leave the current residence;
• Evidence concerning household size; and
• Witness statements.

No single document always guarantees success.

For example, living in rented accommodation may strongly support the claim, but the court may still examine whether the purchaser owns another vacant and suitable home.

Conversely, ownership of another property does not automatically defeat the action if that property is occupied, unavailable or unsuitable for the claimed need.

Evidence of a Workplace Need

A workplace claim should be supported by concrete business evidence.

The purchaser may submit:

• Trade registry records;
• Tax documents;
• Professional certificates;
• Business licences;
• Corporate decisions;
• The current workplace lease;
• A termination notice relating to the current workplace;
• Applications for permits;
• Equipment purchase documents;
• Architectural plans; and
• Technical assessments of the property.

The claimant should explain why the rented property is particularly suitable and why possession is actually required.

A general wish to conduct business is weaker than an existing enterprise that must relocate or a professionally supported plan that is ready to begin.

Does Ownership of Another Property Prevent Eviction?

Not automatically.

The existence of another property is one of the circumstances evaluated by the court. The central question is whether that property is vacant, available and suitable for the same need.

The court may compare:

• Location;
• Size;
• Physical condition;
• Accessibility;
• Distance from employment or education;
• Occupation status;
• Commercial suitability;
• Licensing possibilities; and
• Family requirements.

A vacant apartment in another city may not satisfy a purchaser who must live near a workplace in Istanbul. A basement workplace may not be suitable for a regulated health business. An occupied property may not be immediately available.

However, if the purchaser owns another vacant property with substantially similar characteristics, the claimant should explain why the tenanted property is still necessary.

Can the Tenant Be Evicted for Refusing a New Rent?

Refusal to accept the purchaser’s proposed rent does not itself create a need-based eviction ground.

The purchaser remains bound by the existing rental agreement and the rent-increase rules of the Turkish Code of Obligations.

If five years have been completed, the owner may consider a rent-determination lawsuit. If ordinary annual renewal applies, the increase must remain within the statutory framework.

A purchaser who tells the tenant, “Pay the requested amount or I will claim that I need the property,” may create evidence undermining the sincerity of a later eviction claim.

Prior negotiations do not automatically prove bad faith, but the content and timing of those communications may be considered by the court.

Can the New Owner Change the Locks?

No.

The purchaser cannot change the locks, remove the tenant’s belongings, enter the premises without consent or disconnect essential utilities merely because the title deed has changed.

The tenant remains the lawful possessor under the continuing rental agreement until possession is voluntarily surrendered or recovered through an enforceable legal process.

Self-help measures may create civil liability and may also result in criminal complaints depending on the conduct involved.

The appropriate route is written notification, mandatory mediation, litigation and, following an enforceable judgment, formal enforcement if the tenant still refuses to leave.

Rent Payments During the Eviction Process

The tenant must continue paying rent while the proceedings continue.

Filing a need-based eviction lawsuit does not suspend the tenant’s payment obligations. Failure to pay may create separate default and enforcement consequences.

After receiving reliable evidence of the ownership transfer, the tenant should pay rent to the new owner or the person authorised by the new owner.

Each bank transfer should state the relevant month and property address.

If uncertainty exists regarding whether payment should be made to the seller or purchaser, the tenant should seek legal advice rather than stop paying completely.

Can the New Owner Rely on Other Eviction Grounds?

Yes.

Article 351 is not the only possible ground available to the purchaser. As the successor to the rental relationship, the new owner may also rely on other statutory rights where their individual conditions exist.

These may include:

• Non-payment of rent;
• Two justified notices;
• A valid written eviction undertaking;
• Serious misuse of the property;
• Unauthorised subletting;
• Reconstruction or major renovation;
• The tenant’s ownership of another suitable residence; or
• Completion of the ten-year extension period.

Each ground has separate notice, evidence and filing requirements.

For example, a valid eviction undertaking previously given to the former owner may, in appropriate circumstances, be relied upon by the purchaser as the successor to the landlord’s position. The document’s execution date, validity and one-month enforcement period must still be examined individually.

Re-Letting Prohibition After Eviction

A purchaser who obtains possession because of a claimed housing or workplace need cannot freely rent the property to another person immediately afterward.

Article 355 of the Turkish Code of Obligations prohibits the landlord from renting the property to someone other than the former tenant for three years unless a justified reason exists.

If this prohibition is violated, the former tenant may claim compensation. The compensation cannot be less than one year’s rent calculated according to the rent paid during the final rental year.

The purpose of this rule is to discourage fictitious need claims used merely to remove an existing tenant and obtain a higher rental income.

A justified reason may arise where an unforeseeable event makes the intended use impossible, such as serious illness, compulsory relocation or another significant change. The existence of a justified reason must be evaluated according to the individual circumstances.

How Can the Former Tenant Prove a Violation?

A former tenant who suspects that the property was re-let should preserve evidence such as:

• The eviction judgment;
• The mediation record;
• The key-delivery report;
• New rental advertisements;
• Building management information;
• Address records;
• Witness statements;
• Communications with the new occupant; and
• Evidence of rental payments or commercial use.

The former tenant should distinguish between temporary use by a protected family member and an actual new rental relationship.

The purchaser should likewise preserve documents if the original need could not be fulfilled because of an unforeseen and justified development.

Common Mistakes Made by New Owners

The most common mistake is assuming that the title deed provides an immediate eviction right.

Other frequent errors include:

• Missing the one-month notification period;
• Sending the notice within one month but failing to ensure timely service;
• Failing to identify the person whose need is claimed;
• Treating the six-month period as an automatic vacation deadline;
• Filing before completing mandatory mediation;
• Failing to prove genuine need;
• Relying solely on the purchase price or low rent;
• Ignoring another vacant and suitable property;
• Bringing the case before the wrong court;
• Re-letting the property after eviction; and
• Relying on the seller’s unsupported promise of vacant delivery.

A purchaser should conduct rental-law due diligence before completing the acquisition, not after the title deed is transferred.

Common Mistakes Made by Tenants

Tenants sometimes assume that a new owner can never obtain eviction if rent is paid regularly.

Regular payment protects the tenant against default-based proceedings but does not eliminate a genuine Article 351 need claim.

Another mistake is ignoring the written notice, mediation invitation or court documents.

Tenants should verify:

• The title acquisition date;
• The date the notice was received;
• Whether notice was received within one month;
• The claimed user of the property;
• The six-month calculation;
• The contractual renewal date;
• Completion of mediation; and
• The evidence supporting the need.

The tenant should also continue paying rent through a traceable method and should not sign a replacement lease or evacuation undertaking without reviewing its consequences.

Due Diligence Before Buying Tenanted Property

A purchaser should obtain and review the complete rental file before acquisition.

The review should include:

• The original rental agreement;
• All amendments and renewal documents;
• The tenant’s payment history;
• The current rent;
• The rental commencement date;
• The security deposit;
• Existing notices;
• Eviction undertakings;
• Mediation records;
• Court or enforcement proceedings;
• The identity of all occupants; and
• The property’s suitability for the intended use.

The purchaser should not rely solely on statements made by the seller or estate agent.

Where vacant possession is essential, the sale agreement should address the risk that the tenant may not leave voluntarily. The purchase price, closing conditions and seller’s liability may need to be structured accordingly.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can a new owner immediately evict an existing tenant?

No. The existing lease continues. The purchaser must establish a statutory ground and follow the required notice, mediation and court procedure.

How long does the purchaser have to notify the tenant?

To use the special six-month route under Article 351, the written notification must reach the tenant within one month following acquisition.

Does the tenant have to leave six months after the sale?

No. Six months is the waiting period before the purchaser may file the special eviction lawsuit. Eviction still requires voluntary agreement or an enforceable judgment.

Can the purchaser wait until the lease period ends?

Yes. Article 351 permits the new owner to file a need-based action within one month following the end of the contractual period.

Must the new owner prove personal need?

Yes. The need must be genuine, sincere, compulsory and continuing.

Can the property be required for the purchaser’s child or parent?

Yes. The needs of the purchaser’s descendants and ascendants are expressly protected.

Can a company obtain eviction?

A company may rely on its own genuine workplace need. It cannot ordinarily rely on a personal residential need or automatically use a shareholder’s personal need as the company’s need.

Is mandatory mediation required?

Yes. A need-based eviction action under Article 351 is generally subject to mandatory mediation before litigation.

Which court hears the case?

The Civil Court of Peace generally has subject-matter jurisdiction.

Can the new owner demand market rent immediately?

No. The existing rent and statutory increase rules remain applicable. Sale of the property does not create an unrestricted increase right.

Can the purchaser change the locks after six months?

No. Physical possession must be recovered voluntarily or through a lawful enforcement process based on an enforceable legal instrument.

Can the property be rented to another tenant after need-based eviction?

Not ordinarily during the three-year statutory period unless a justified reason exists. Violation may result in compensation of at least one year’s final rent.

Conclusion

The new property owner’s right to evict a tenant in Turkey is a statutory but strictly regulated remedy.

The sale or transfer of rented property does not automatically terminate the lease. The purchaser becomes a party to the existing rental agreement and must respect the tenant’s contractual and statutory rights.

Where the property is genuinely required as a residence or workplace, Article 351 provides two alternative procedures.

The purchaser may ensure that written notice reaches the tenant within one month following acquisition and file a lawsuit after six months. Alternatively, the purchaser may wait until the end of the existing contractual period and bring the need-based action within the statutory period following expiry.

In both cases, the purchaser must prove that the need is genuine, sincere, compulsory and continuing. Ownership, a high purchase price, low rent or a general desire to use the property is not enough.

Mandatory mediation must generally be completed before litigation, and the Civil Court of Peace hears the resulting eviction action.

The parties should also consider the consequences after eviction. A new owner who obtains possession based on need cannot ordinarily rent the property to another person for three years without a justified reason.

For purchasers, legal due diligence before acquisition is essential. For tenants, careful examination of the title transfer, notice date, claimed need and procedural periods may be decisive.

Because a missed one-month period, defective notification or unsupported need allegation may determine the outcome, each matter should be evaluated according to its individual rental agreement, acquisition records, service documents and evidence.

Legal Disclaimer: This article provides general information concerning a new property owner’s right to evict a tenant in Turkey and does not constitute legal advice. Each matter must be assessed according to the acquisition date, rental agreement, notice and service records, claimed housing or workplace need, mandatory mediation process and specific circumstances of the parties.