Real estate disputes in Turkey rarely involve only one legal question.

A conflict that begins with a simple disagreement over a property sale may quickly involve title deed law, contractual liability, defects in the property, zoning regulations, consumer protection, fraud allegations, co-ownership, construction law, administrative proceedings or enforcement measures.

For buyers, the problem may be that they paid the purchase price but never received the title deed.

For sellers, the buyer may fail to pay the agreed price or refuse to complete the transaction.

For investors, disputes may involve developers, business partners, tenants, co-owners, zoning restrictions, illegal construction or third parties claiming ownership rights.

The appropriate legal remedy therefore depends on identifying the true legal nature of the dispute.

This article examines the principal types of property disputes in Turkey and the remedies available to buyers, sellers and investors.

1. The Starting Point: Who Legally Owns the Property?

The first question in almost every Turkish real estate dispute is:

Who is registered as the owner at the Land Registry?

Under Article 705 of the Turkish Civil Code, ownership of immovable property is generally acquired through registration in the land registry.

Article 706 further provides that agreements intended to transfer ownership of real estate must comply with the legally required official form.

This distinction is extremely important.

A person may:

• pay the entire purchase price;
• receive possession of the property;
• sign a private contract;
• renovate the property;
• live in the property for years;

and still not necessarily be the registered legal owner.

For this reason, possession and ownership must never be treated as the same concept.

2. The Title Deed Was Never Transferred: What Can the Buyer Do?

One of the most common property disputes occurs where the buyer pays all or part of the purchase price, but the seller subsequently refuses to transfer the title deed.

The available remedy depends primarily on the legal validity of the underlying transaction.

Article 237 of the Turkish Code of Obligations provides that a real estate sale must be executed in official form in order to be valid.

Consequently, an ordinary handwritten or privately signed document will generally not itself operate as a valid completed real estate sale.

However, the buyer may still have substantial remedies.

Where there is a valid legal basis giving the buyer a personal right to demand registration, Article 716 of the Turkish Civil Code allows a person entitled to request registration to seek judicial transfer where the owner refuses to perform.

Depending on the circumstances, this may result in a claim seeking registration of ownership through a court judgment.

Where compulsory registration is legally unavailable because the underlying agreement is invalid, the buyer may instead seek repayment of amounts paid.

Article 77 of the Turkish Code of Obligations provides the basis for restitution where a person has been enriched without a valid legal reason, including situations where the anticipated legal basis for the payment was invalid, failed to materialise or subsequently ceased to exist.

Accordingly, the dispute may become either:

a title transfer dispute,
or
a restitution / money recovery dispute.

Choosing between the two is one of the most important strategic decisions in the case.

3. Tapu İptali ve Tescil: Title Cancellation and Registration Actions

One of the most significant remedies in Turkish real estate litigation is the tapu iptali ve tescil davası, meaning an action for cancellation of an incorrect title registration and registration of ownership in the claimant’s name.

Article 1025 of the Turkish Civil Code provides that a person whose real right has been damaged by an unlawful registration may seek correction of the land registry.

Such actions may arise from numerous legal situations, including:

• invalid transfers;
• forged transactions;
• abuse of power of attorney;
• fraudulent transfers;
• sham transactions;
• inheritance disputes;
• incapacity of the transferring owner;
• breach of fiduciary arrangements;
• unlawful registrations; and
• certain contractual claims supporting compulsory registration.

However, title cancellation litigation becomes significantly more complicated once the property has been transferred to a third person.

4. What If the Property Has Already Been Sold to Someone Else?

Turkish law provides important protection to good-faith third parties relying on the land registry.

Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code states that a third person who acquires ownership or another real right in good faith by relying on the land registry is protected.

However, Article 1024 provides that a person who knew or should have known that the registration was unlawful cannot rely on that registration.

This creates one of the most important factual disputes in title litigation:

Was the subsequent purchaser genuinely acting in good faith?

For example, suspicious circumstances may become relevant where:

• the property was sold far below market value;
• the new owner is a close relative or business associate of the transferor;
• the purchaser knew about an existing dispute;
• litigation had already begun;
• the purchaser knew that the seller had obtained the property improperly; or
• the factual circumstances were sufficiently unusual that further investigation should reasonably have been expected.

Good faith is therefore often decisive in determining whether the original owner can recover the property itself or must pursue monetary compensation instead.

5. The Property Is Different From What Was Promised

Another major category of property disputes concerns defective real estate.

A buyer may discover after the purchase that:

• the property is smaller than represented;
• part of the property is illegal;
• the building lacks an occupancy permit;
• there are serious structural defects;
• water insulation is defective;
• common areas were represented as private areas;
• the parking space does not legally belong to the unit;
• the apartment is materially different from the approved project;
• promised facilities were never constructed; or
• the property’s legal or physical characteristics materially differ from the sales representations.

Article 219 of the Turkish Code of Obligations makes the seller responsible where the sold property does not possess characteristics represented to the buyer or contains material, legal or economic defects that substantially reduce its value or usefulness. The statutory rule can apply even where the seller did not know that the defect existed.

A defect in real estate therefore does not necessarily have to be a physical construction problem.

A property may also suffer from a legal defect or economic defect.

6. What Remedies Does the Buyer Have for a Defective Property?

Article 227 of the Turkish Code of Obligations provides several alternative remedies to the buyer where the seller is liable for defects.

The buyer may, depending on the circumstances:

• withdraw from the contract and return the property;
• keep the property and demand a reduction in the purchase price;
• require the defect to be repaired at the seller’s expense where this does not involve disproportionate cost; or
• where possible, seek replacement with a defect-free equivalent.

Claims for damages may also arise under the applicable rules.

In real estate disputes, the most practically significant remedies are usually:

termination of the sale,
price reduction, and
compensation for financial loss.

The seriousness of the defect will normally influence which remedy is appropriate.

A minor defect capable of inexpensive correction may not justify termination of an entire high-value property transaction.

By contrast, a building exposed to demolition, serious structural failure or substantial legal restrictions may support far more extensive claims.

7. Hidden Defects Are Particularly Important

A major dispute often concerns whether a defect was:

open and discoverable, or
hidden and discoverable only later.

For example, visible cracks may be treated differently from an undisclosed structural engineering defect.

Likewise, a clearly missing occupancy permit may be treated differently from an illegal construction detail that could only be discovered by comparing the physical property with municipal architectural records.

The timing of discovery can affect notification requirements, limitation periods and the evidence required to prove the case.

For structures, Article 244 of the Turkish Code of Obligations contains a special limitation framework for defects in buildings; the general rule is five years, with a longer twenty-year period where the seller is grossly at fault.

The exact limitation analysis must nevertheless be performed on the basis of the specific legal relationship and the nature of the claim.

8. Property Purchased From a Developer or Construction Company

The legal position may be more protective where an individual purchases a residence from a professional developer or construction company for consumer purposes.

In qualifying consumer transactions, the Consumer Protection Law No. 6502 may apply.

The legislation provides consumers with remedies for defective goods and imposes a five-year limitation period from delivery for residential and holiday-purpose immovable property, unless a longer period applies.

This framework may become relevant where:

• the apartment is delivered late;
• the delivered apartment differs from the project;
• promised social facilities are absent;
• construction quality is defective;
• usable area is materially smaller;
• the property contains legal or technical defects; or
• the developer fails to transfer the property as agreed.

Whether the buyer legally qualifies as a “consumer” must be determined according to the purpose and circumstances of the transaction.

A person purchasing numerous properties as part of a professional investment activity should not automatically assume that consumer-law protections will apply.

9. Delayed Delivery of Off-Plan Property

Off-plan property purchases create another significant area of litigation.

The investor or buyer may make staged payments while the development is still under construction.

Problems arise when the developer:

• misses the contractual delivery date;
• stops construction;
• becomes financially distressed;
• changes the project;
• sells the same unit to another person;
• creates mortgages or other encumbrances;
• delivers a substantially different property; or
• refuses to transfer title after receiving payment.

The legal strategy must examine both the contract and the current status of the property.

Depending on the circumstances, remedies may include:

• performance;
• termination;
• repayment;
• delay compensation;
• contractual penalties;
• damages; and
• provisional judicial protection.

The buyer should not wait passively where there is evidence that the property may be transferred or encumbered during the dispute.

10. Interim Injunctions Can Be Crucial

Property litigation often lasts much longer than the time needed to sell a property.

This creates a significant risk:

The claimant begins litigation, but the defendant transfers the property before the case is resolved.

The Turkish Code of Civil Procedure therefore provides for interim judicial measures where changes in the existing situation may make enforcement of the right significantly more difficult or impossible, or where delay could cause serious harm. The rules on interim injunctions are contained in Articles 389 and following of the Code of Civil Procedure.

In an appropriate title dispute, the claimant may therefore consider requesting an interim measure restricting disposal of the disputed property.

Obtaining such a measure is not automatic.

The claimant must establish the statutory conditions and sufficiently demonstrate the underlying claim and urgency.

Nevertheless, in some cases the injunction is almost as important as the lawsuit itself.

11. Seller’s Remedies When the Buyer Does Not Pay

Property disputes do not only concern buyer protection.

Sellers may face buyers who:

• fail to pay the remaining purchase price;
• delay payment;
• refuse to attend the completion transaction;
• take possession but fail to perform contractual obligations; or
• breach instalment or financing arrangements.

Depending on the contract and the stage of the transaction, the seller may pursue:

• payment of the outstanding amount;
• default interest;
• contractual penalties;
• termination of the agreement;
• damages; or
• enforcement proceedings.

The precise remedy depends heavily on whether title has already been transferred and whether the underlying sale agreement is legally valid.

Where ownership has already been transferred while part of the purchase price remains unpaid, the dispute will often become primarily a monetary claim rather than a title dispute unless additional legal grounds exist.

12. Deposit and Down-Payment Disputes

Another frequent conflict concerns money described as:

deposit, reservation payment, earnest money, advance payment or kapora.

The legal character of the payment cannot safely be determined merely from the word used by the parties.

The court may examine:

• the wording of the agreement;
• why the payment was made;
• which party withdrew;
• whether a binding contract existed;
• whether statutory formalities were satisfied; and
• whether the recipient had a valid legal basis to retain the money.

Where the contemplated transaction fails and there is no valid basis for retaining the payment, restitution principles under Article 77 of the Turkish Code of Obligations may become relevant.

Accordingly, the statement “the deposit is automatically forfeited” should never be accepted without analysing the agreement.

13. Fraudulent or Unauthorised Property Sales

More serious disputes arise where a property is transferred without the true owner’s valid consent.

Examples include:

• forged signatures;
• fake powers of attorney;
• abuse of genuine powers of attorney;
• transfers made by legally incapacitated persons;
• fraudulent identity documents;
• unauthorised transfers by representatives; and
• transfers designed to remove property from the true owner.

Such cases may involve both civil and criminal proceedings.

From the civil-law perspective, the primary objective may be cancellation of the unlawful registration under Article 1025 of the Civil Code.

However, if the property subsequently reaches a protected good-faith third purchaser, recovery of the property itself can become substantially more difficult because of Article 1023.

Therefore, speed can be critically important in fraudulent-transfer cases.

14. Co-Ownership and Investor Disputes

Real estate investments are often made jointly.

Friends, relatives, business partners or investors may purchase a property together and later disagree about:

• use of the property;
• rental income;
• renovation costs;
• sale price;
• management;
• occupation by one co-owner;
• redevelopment; or
• whether the investment should be sold.

Under Article 688 of the Turkish Civil Code, co-owners in shared ownership hold specified shares in an undivided asset. Each co-owner may generally dispose of his or her own share within the legal framework.

Where continued co-ownership is no longer workable, termination of co-ownership may be requested.

Article 699 provides that partition may occur through physical division where appropriate or through sale and distribution of the proceeds where physical division is not reasonably possible without significant loss of value.

For investors, an ortaklığın giderilmesi proceeding can therefore become the ultimate exit mechanism from a failed co-investment.

15. Statutory Pre-Emption Rights Can Affect Share Purchases

Purchasing a share in jointly owned land creates another potential risk.

Article 732 of the Turkish Civil Code provides other co-owners with a statutory pre-emption right where a co-owner sells his or her share to a third party.

An investor purchasing only a share rather than the entire property should therefore investigate:

• who the other co-owners are;
• whether pre-emption rights may arise;
• whether prior disputes exist; and
• whether the investor will realistically be able to use or develop the property.

Buying an inexpensive fractional share in land can create considerably more legal risk than purchasing an independent property.

16. Rental Disputes Affect Property Investors

For investment properties, litigation frequently begins after acquisition rather than during the purchase.

Common disputes include:

• unpaid rent;
• eviction;
• rent determination;
• rent adjustment;
• deposit disputes;
• unauthorised alterations;
• subletting;
• damage to the property; and
• disagreements over termination.

Since 1 September 2023, disputes arising from rental relationships are generally subject to mandatory mediation before litigation, except for statutory proceedings concerning eviction through the specific non-judicial enforcement mechanism referenced in the mediation legislation.

Accordingly, investors buying tenanted property should investigate the existing tenancy before acquisition.

A property may be legally owned by the investor but economically constrained by an existing tenant and the applicable tenancy regime.

17. Co-Ownership, Condominium and Neighbour Disputes: Mediation First

Mandatory mediation also applies, since 1 September 2023, to:

• disputes concerning partition and termination of co-ownership;
• disputes arising from the Condominium Law; and
• neighbour-law disputes.

These categories are expressly included in Article 18/B of the Mediation Law.

This procedural requirement should be checked before filing an action.

Failure to complete mandatory pre-litigation mediation where required can prevent the case from proceeding normally.

18. Real Estate Transfers Can Also Be Settled Through Mediation

Turkish law also allows disputes involving the transfer of immovable property or the creation of limited real rights to be resolved through mediation.

Article 17/B of the Mediation Law, effective from 1 September 2023, created a special framework for such settlements.

The legislation also permits, subject to its conditions, a temporary annotation restricting disposal during the mediation process, and agreements concerning the transfer of immovable property are subject to additional judicial enforceability review.

This mechanism can be particularly useful where the parties are willing to settle a title dispute without completing lengthy litigation.

19. Consumer Property Disputes and Mandatory Mediation

Where the transaction qualifies as a consumer transaction, consumer courts have jurisdiction over disputes arising from consumer transactions and practices.

Consumer-court disputes are generally subject to mandatory mediation before litigation under Article 73/A, subject to statutory exceptions.

This can apply to many disputes against developers and professional property sellers.

Correctly identifying the competent court and whether mediation is required is therefore part of the legal strategy, not merely a procedural technicality.

20. Zoning Problems Can Create Private and Administrative Cases Simultaneously

Property litigation becomes particularly complex where the underlying problem concerns zoning law.

An investor may discover that:

• part of the building is illegal;
• an additional floor lacks approval;
• the property differs from its municipal project;
• there is a demolition order;
• an administrative zoning fine exists;
• development rights are lower than represented; or
• part of the land is reserved for public use.

Such a situation may create two separate disputes.

The first is an administrative-law dispute concerning the municipality or relevant authority.

The second is a private-law dispute against the seller, developer or other contractual party.

Winning compensation from the seller does not automatically legalise the building.

Likewise, successfully challenging a municipal decision does not necessarily eliminate contractual liability between buyer and seller.

The two proceedings must therefore be analysed separately.

21. Wrongful Occupation of Property

A registered owner may also face a person occupying the property without a valid legal right.

Article 683 of the Turkish Civil Code allows the owner to bring an action to recover property unlawfully possessed and to seek prevention of unlawful interference.

Depending on the circumstances, the owner may also seek compensation for unauthorised use, commonly encountered in Turkish practice as an ecrimisil claim.

These disputes frequently arise between:

• co-heirs;
• former spouses;
• relatives;
• former owners;
• co-owners; and
• persons remaining in possession after their legal basis for occupation has ended.

22. Where Should a Title Dispute Be Filed?

Jurisdiction must always be analysed separately from the merits of the claim.

Under Article 12 of the Turkish Code of Civil Procedure, actions concerning rights in rem over immovable property, actions capable of changing ownership of a real right and certain possession-related claims are subject to the exclusive territorial jurisdiction of the court where the property is located.

Therefore, parties cannot simply choose any courthouse merely because they live elsewhere or signed documents in another city.

The competent type of court must then be determined separately.

Depending on the dispute, this may involve:

• civil courts of first instance;
• consumer courts;
• civil courts of peace;
• commercial courts; or
• administrative courts.

A property dispute should therefore never be filed before determining both jurisdiction and venue.

23. Evidence Usually Decides the Case

The strongest property claim may fail if it cannot be proven.

Important evidence may include:

• current and historical title deed records;
• official sale documents;
• powers of attorney;
• bank transfers;
• SWIFT records;
• receipts;
• construction agreements;
• reservation and preliminary sale agreements;
• WhatsApp and email communications;
• advertisements;
• brochures;
• architectural projects;
• building permits;
• occupancy permits;
• municipal files;
• photographs and videos;
• valuation reports;
• expert reports;
• rental contracts; and
• witness evidence where legally admissible.

In particular, bank transfers should ideally identify the legal purpose of the payment.

A transfer merely stating “payment” may be much harder to connect to a disputed property than one clearly identifying the relevant unit, parcel or purchase transaction.

24. What Should a Buyer Do When a Dispute Begins?

The buyer should first determine whether the primary objective is:

to obtain the property
or
to recover money.

These objectives can require very different legal strategies.

The buyer should immediately obtain:

1. current title deed records;
2. transaction history;
3. contractual documents;
4. payment records;
5. municipal documents where relevant; and
6. evidence of communications with the seller.

If there is a risk that the property will be sold again, interim protection should be considered without delay.

25. What Should a Seller Do?

The seller should preserve evidence showing:

• what was actually promised;
• which characteristics of the property were disclosed;
• what payments were received;
• whether the buyer defaulted;
• whether the buyer inspected the property;
• whether zoning or occupancy information was disclosed; and
• whether possession was delivered.

In defective-property disputes, the seller’s defence often depends on distinguishing between:

a genuine hidden defect,
and
a condition that the buyer knew or reasonably could have identified before purchase.

26. What Should a Real Estate Investor Do?

Investors should approach disputes differently from ordinary residential purchasers.

The primary questions are usually economic:

• Can the asset still generate revenue?
• Can the problem be legally corrected?
• What is the expected litigation period?
• Is the property transferable?
• Is there a risk of further encumbrances?
• Is settlement financially preferable?
• Is the claim against the seller more valuable than recovery of the property itself?

A legally possible remedy is not always the commercially best remedy.

For example, recovering ownership after several years of litigation may be less attractive than obtaining immediate repayment with compensation where the investment strategy has already changed.

27. The Most Important Strategic Question: Property or Money?

Many real estate cases can ultimately be reduced to one fundamental strategic choice:

Do you want the property, or do you want the financial value of the property?

The answer affects:

• the cause of action;
• the defendant;
• limitation periods;
• court jurisdiction;
• interim measures;
• evidence;
• settlement strategy; and
• calculation of damages.

This issue should be decided as early as possible.

Conclusion: Property Disputes Require More Than a Title Deed Search

Real estate disputes in Turkey sit at the intersection of property law, contract law, consumer protection, civil procedure, zoning law and sometimes criminal law.

For a buyer, the appropriate remedy may involve:

title cancellation and registration, compulsory registration, termination, repayment, price reduction, repair or compensation.

For a seller, the remedy may involve:

collection of the unpaid purchase price, default interest, contractual penalties, termination or damages.

For an investor, additional disputes may involve:

co-ownership, tenants, developers, zoning restrictions, illegal construction, title defects and project failure.

The Turkish Civil Code provides strong protection for registered property rights, while also protecting third parties who genuinely rely on the land registry in good faith.

The Turkish Code of Obligations separately provides contractual, defect and restitution remedies.

For this reason, the first question in a Turkish real estate dispute should never simply be:

“Who is right?”

The better legal questions are:

Who owns the property?
What legal transaction occurred?
What was paid?
What was promised?
What is registered at the Land Registry?
Has the property reached a third party?
And is the commercially preferable remedy the property itself or financial compensation?