Introduction:
land is the first “permit” in energy—yet it is rarely the simplest one
Energy projects in Turkey—wind farms, solar parks, hydro plants, geothermal facilities, pipelines, substations, and transmission lines—are ultimately built on land. Even where the project company does not need full ownership, it typically needs secure, bankable land rights: ownership, easement (right of way), usufruct, lease, or usage permits over public lands. When voluntary acquisition fails or time pressure becomes critical, the legal tool that often enters the picture is expropriation (kamulaştırma) under Expropriation Law No. 2942. (LEXPERA)
In the energy sector, expropriation is not only a “public administration” concept. The electricity market legislation explicitly sets out how land acquisition for generation and distribution projects is handled, and it assigns critical roles to the regulator and certain public entities. For generation projects, the acquisition procedure is carried out by the regulatory authority under Law No. 2942, and the decision taken for these land acquisitions also functions as a public interest decision that does not require approval from another authority.
The most controversial instrument is urgent expropriation (acele kamulaştırma), which allows the administration to obtain immediate possession of an immovable property through a rapid court process—while other stages are completed later. Article 27 of Law No. 2942 is the legal basis and it allows possession within an accelerated timeline (including a court decision within seven days after an expert valuation and deposit). (LEXPERA)
This guide is designed for two audiences:
- Investors, developers, and project companies who need a predictable land acquisition pathway to protect construction schedules, financing milestones, and licensing timelines; and
- Landowners and right holders who want to protect property rights, ensure fair compensation, and use effective remedies when urgent measures are applied.
1) The energy-specific legal layer: who handles land acquisition in electricity projects?
1.1 Generation projects: EMRA/EPDK as the procedural gatekeeper
Under the electricity market framework, land acquisition for generation activities by private law entities holding a pre-license or license is carried out by the Authority pursuant to Expropriation Law No. 2942. The Authority evaluates the request and, if appropriate, the Board renders a decision. Those Board decisions also serve as public interest decisions and are not subject to approval by another authority.
This matters in practice because the “public interest” layer—one of the most litigated elements in expropriation—may be embedded into the EMRA Board decision for land procurement in generation projects.
1.2 Ownership vs. easement: how title is usually structured
The same framework provides that ownership and/or property rights established through expropriation or transfer are registered in the name of a relevant public institution (or, absent that, the Ministry of Finance/Treasury), and then a free easement right may be established in favor of the private license holder, limited to the license period, or a permission to use may be granted; in some cases properties can be leased without charge.
This creates a key deal reality: in many energy projects, the land is not “owned” by the project company even when the company funds the acquisition process. The project’s security is therefore largely contractual and administrative: the easement/usage authorization must be drafted and recorded correctly, and its term must align with the license duration.
1.3 Who pays—and what happens if the license is cancelled?
Costs related to expropriation and related transactions (transfer, easement establishment, usage permits, leasing, compensation and other expenses) are paid by the private pre-license/license holder, and agreements on State/Treasury lands must include an express term limiting validity to the pre-license/license period.
If the pre-license holder fails to obtain a license or if the pre-license/license expires or is cancelled and the expropriated immovables are later allocated to another project by easement/lease/permit, the expropriation fees paid by the first entity are to be reimbursed by the successor pre-license/license holder.
Investor takeaway: land acquisition is a regulated expense and should be modeled as a recoverable (or reimbursable) item only if the regulatory conditions are met and documentation is clean.
1.4 Distribution projects: TEDAŞ as the land acquisition channel
For electricity distribution activities, the acquisition procedure is carried out by TEDAŞ pursuant to Law No. 2942 and relevant legislation; TEDAŞ evaluates requests and issues decisions that also serve as public interest decisions and do not require additional approval.
2) Standard expropriation process in Turkey (Law No. 2942): what happens in the “ordinary” route?
Expropriation in Turkey is governed primarily by Expropriation Law No. 2942, which regulates pre-expropriation steps, expropriation methods, registration, and urgent procedures.
While the law is detailed, the ordinary route can be understood as a structured sequence:
- Public interest decision + commencement decision
- Negotiation/amicable settlement attempt
- Administrative valuation and offer
- Judicial action for price determination and registration
- Deposit of the determined amount and registration/possession mechanics
In practice, energy projects try to resolve the land issue by agreements (purchase, lease, easement) before litigation. However, where negotiations fail or the project requires corridor continuity (lines/pipelines), expropriation becomes the tool of last resort.
3) Urgent expropriation (Acele Kamulaştırma): what it is, when it can be used, and why it is heavily litigated
3.1 The legal basis and conditions (Article 27)
Article 27 of Expropriation Law No. 2942 defines urgent expropriation as an exceptional procedure that can be used in three scenarios:
- national defense needs under Law No. 3634,
- cases whose urgency is decided by the Council of Ministers (in practice now performed under the executive authority structure), or
- extraordinary situations provided by special laws. (LEXPERA)
The distinctive feature is speed: at the request of the administration, the court determines a value through experts and—within seven days—possession can be granted once the amount is deposited in a national bank on behalf of the owner; other expropriation steps are completed later. (LEXPERA)
3.2 What “possession first” means in real life
The Land Registry General Directorate’s 2024 Circular confirms the operational logic:
- the court may issue a possession decision within seven days based on expert valuation,
- the amount is deposited to a bank indicated in the invitation/announcement,
- the possession decision is notified to the land registry and an annotation is placed that the immovable cannot be transferred, assigned, or otherwise disposed of,
- and the court’s urgent procedure decision is limited to possession (no registration judgment at that stage).
Landowner reality: you may lose practical control and use of your property quickly—even before broader legality review is completed.
Investor reality: urgent possession may allow construction to start, but it can also create a major legal vulnerability if the urgency decision is later annulled.
4) The “two-track” litigation system: administrative courts vs. judicial courts
One of the most confusing aspects for clients is that urgent expropriation creates parallel proceedings:
- Administrative courts review the lawfulness of public interest decisions, expropriation decisions, and urgent expropriation decisions (annulment actions).
- Judicial courts (civil courts) handle actions for determination of the expropriation price and registration.
The Turkish Constitutional Court’s 3 January 2024 press release explains this structural split and notes that price/registration cases may conclude before annulment cases, creating legal complications if registration occurs while the urgent procedure is later annulled. (anayasa.gov.tr)
The same press release highlights a recurring practical problem: owners may be forced into a separate action to re-register the immovable under their name even after an annulment decision, and requests for stay of execution may not effectively stop the registration outcome in the civil case. (anayasa.gov.tr)
4.1 Why stay of execution becomes a critical remedy
In energy projects, timing is everything. If the urgent procedure is executed, possession begins and sometimes registration follows via the judicial case. The Constitutional Court’s analysis points to the risk that an annulment decision becomes “ineffective” if the property is already registered to the administration and used de facto for years. (anayasa.gov.tr)
Practical lesson for landowners: an early and well-founded request for interim relief can be strategically essential, even if outcomes vary.
Practical lesson for investors: reliance on urgent expropriation should be treated as a legal-risk exposure that must be managed through documentation, justification, and contingency planning.
5) Energy project context: how urgent expropriation decisions typically arise
The Constitutional Court press release provides a concrete energy-sector example: EMRA issued a public-interest decision; the Ministry of Finance decided expropriation; and the Council of Ministers decided to apply urgent expropriation for a wind power plant. (anayasa.gov.tr)
This pattern—regulatory public interest decision + treasury/administration expropriation steps + urgent procedure—appears in several types of energy projects where corridor continuity or time-bound licensing milestones are critical.
6) What courts scrutinize in urgent expropriation disputes (and how you build a winning file)
Urgent expropriation is legally framed as an exceptional measure. That means the legal debate often focuses on:
6.1 “Is there genuine urgency?”
Article 27 itself links urgency to narrow categories and extraordinary situations. (LEXPERA)
If the administration cannot demonstrate why the ordinary procedure would undermine public order, energy supply security, or project necessity within a concrete timeframe, the urgent decision becomes vulnerable.
6.2 Proportionality and least intrusive measures
Even when a project is legitimate, the question is whether urgent possession is proportionate. In energy projects, alternatives may include:
- route or layout adjustments to reduce private land impact,
- voluntary easement structures with enhanced compensation,
- phased access that preserves some use rights.
6.3 The evidence that actually persuades courts
Whether you represent a project company or a landowner, courts respond to tangible proof, not broad assertions. Strong files typically include:
- maps, coordinates, and route selection studies (why this corridor is necessary),
- licensing timelines and grid connection obligations (why delay matters),
- negotiation records (offers, counteroffers, meeting minutes),
- technical reports explaining why partial measures are not feasible,
- valuation evidence: comparable sales, agricultural income studies, expert critiques.
7) Compensation and valuation: where most money is won or lost
Even when expropriation is lawful, the owner is entitled to fair compensation consistent with the property right protections. The Constitutional Court press release explicitly frames urgent expropriation as a severe interference with property rights and emphasizes effective protection. (anayasa.gov.tr)
7.1 What “fair value” disputes look like in energy cases
Energy projects frequently involve:
- agricultural land (income-based valuation issues),
- partial expropriation (severance and residual value disputes),
- corridor easements (loss-of-use and restrictions rather than total taking),
- trees, crops, wells, irrigation systems, fencing, and access roads.
Valuation disputes often become expert-heavy. Owners can challenge methodology, comparable selection, capitalization rates, and treatment of improvements. Investors need to budget for realistic, defensible compensation to avoid project delays and litigation escalation.
7.2 The practical role of bank deposits in urgent expropriation
In urgent expropriation, the administration deposits the expert-determined value into a bank account on behalf of the owner, as a condition for taking possession. (LEXPERA)
This deposit is not necessarily the end of the compensation debate; owners can still pursue higher valuation in subsequent stages.
8) Strategy for project companies and investors: how to de-risk expropriation in energy projects
8.1 Build a “land rights” strategy as early as the licensing strategy
Because electricity generation projects have a regulated land acquisition pathway through EMRA and the Treasury structure (ownership/easement), land strategy must be integrated into:
- pre-license milestones,
- financing conditions precedent,
- EPC notice-to-proceed triggers.
8.2 Prioritize negotiated solutions—but document them like a future court case
Courts and administrations look for evidence of good faith efforts. Keep a clean record:
- documented offers,
- proof of service/notifications,
- meeting notes,
- expert-supported valuation offers.
8.3 Use the least intrusive property right where technically possible
Where the project only needs access (transmission lines, pipeline corridors, access roads), an easement approach can reduce conflict—provided it is drafted correctly and aligns with the license period.
8.4 If urgent expropriation is considered, treat “urgency justification” as a legal deliverable
Urgent expropriation is not a mere acceleration technique; it is an exceptional tool whose misuse creates annulment risk. Article 27’s exceptional framing and the Constitutional Court’s analysis on ineffectiveness risks should be internalized in project governance. (LEXPERA)
9) Strategy for landowners: what to do when an energy project targets your property
9.1 Do not treat the first offer as the final value
Initial administrative offers may not fully reflect:
- severance damages,
- restrictions created by easements/corridors,
- agricultural income potential,
- improvements not obvious from registry records.
9.2 Secure evidence early
Gather:
- title and zoning documents,
- agricultural production records (yields, crop cycles),
- invoices for irrigation or improvements,
- photographs and GPS-based mapping of affected areas,
- comparable sales information where possible.
9.3 Understand the litigation map (and act quickly)
You may face:
- administrative litigation against the urgent procedure/public interest decision, and
- a civil court process for price determination and registration.
The Constitutional Court’s 2024 press release underlines that if registration occurs before annulment review is effective, owners may need further litigation to restore title, which is costly and time-consuming. (anayasa.gov.tr)
9.4 Challenge urgent possession where the urgency is not genuinely exceptional
Article 27 limits the urgent procedure to defined exceptional scenarios. (LEXPERA)
If the “urgency” rationale is generic or unsupported, this is typically the core attack point in annulment actions.
9.5 Valuation is not only about “price per square meter”
In corridor-style cases, the real economic harm is often:
- long-term restrictions on building/planting,
- access limitations,
- split parcels and operational inefficiencies,
- diminished marketability of the remainder.
10) A practical checklist: expropriation readiness for energy deals
For investors and developers (pre-acquisition / pre-finance)
- Confirm whether land procurement is handled via EMRA/TEDAŞ and how title/easement will be registered (Treasury vs. easement for license term).
- Review whether land rights will be limited to the license duration and how renewal/extension is addressed.
- Build a budget and timeline for expropriation costs (paid by the private license holder).
- Create a litigation contingency plan if urgent measures are contemplated (including reputational and financing risk). (anayasa.gov.tr)
For landowners and right holders
- Record all notifications and dates; procedural timing can affect remedies.
- Obtain independent valuation support early (especially for agricultural income and severance).
- Consider administrative remedies and interim relief strategies to avoid an “ineffective annulment” outcome. (anayasa.gov.tr)
- Track deposits and bank records in urgent procedures; deposit does not automatically settle the valuation dispute.
Conclusion: expropriation is a legal engineering task, not a last-minute administrative formality
In Turkish energy projects, expropriation sits at the intersection of regulated market law and property rights. The electricity market framework makes land procurement decisions for generation and distribution projects a specialized process—often with EMRA or TEDAŞ involvement and with decisions that function as public interest determinations.
Urgent expropriation, anchored in Article 27 of Law No. 2942, can deliver immediate possession within days—yet it carries heightened annulment and constitutional risk if used without genuine exceptional justification. (LEXPERA)
Whether you represent a developer racing to meet licensing milestones or a landowner defending a constitutional property right, the difference between success and loss is usually the same: a disciplined file, strong evidence, and an early strategy that anticipates parallel proceedings.
Yanıt yok