Eviction Undertaking in Turkey: Validity Requirements and Legal Consequences

on July 17, 2026

An eviction undertaking in Turkey is one of the most effective legal instruments available to a landlord seeking to recover possession of a residential or commercial property. Known in Turkish as a “tahliye taahhütnamesi,” it is a written declaration by which the tenant promises to vacate and deliver the rented property on a specified date.

Unlike an eviction lawsuit based on the landlord’s housing need, reconstruction or unpaid rent, a landlord relying on a valid eviction undertaking does not have to prove a separate reason for recovering the property. If the tenant does not leave on the agreed date, the landlord may initiate non-judicial enforcement proceedings or file an eviction lawsuit within the statutory period.

However, not every document labelled an eviction undertaking is legally valid. Turkish rental law imposes strict conditions intended to protect tenants from being compelled to waive their statutory rights before receiving the property. The document must be in writing, must generally be issued by the tenant, must contain a sufficiently definite eviction date and, most importantly, must be given after the rented property has been delivered to the tenant.

The principal legal provision is Article 352/1 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098. Under this provision, where the tenant gives a written promise after delivery to vacate on a specified date but fails to do so, the landlord may terminate the lease by commencing enforcement proceedings or filing a lawsuit within one month from that date.

The one-month period, the date on which the undertaking was executed, the identity of the signatory and the tenant’s objections are frequently decisive. A substantively valid document may become unusable if the landlord fails to act on time. Conversely, a document signed under questionable circumstances may still create serious consequences where the tenant cannot prove the alleged invalidity.

This comprehensive guide explains the validity requirements, enforcement methods, objections, evidentiary issues and legal consequences of an eviction undertaking in Turkey.

What Is an Eviction Undertaking Under Turkish Law?

An eviction undertaking is a unilateral written commitment made by the tenant to the landlord. Through this document, the tenant undertakes to vacate the rented property voluntarily on a particular date.

The undertaking does not immediately terminate the rental agreement when it is signed. The rental relationship continues until the agreed evacuation date. The tenant remains responsible for paying rent, using the property carefully and complying with all other contractual obligations during this period.

If the tenant leaves on the promised date and properly returns possession and the keys, the undertaking is performed voluntarily. If the tenant remains in the property, Article 352/1 gives the landlord a special termination mechanism.

A valid eviction undertaking may concern either residential premises or roofed commercial premises. It is commonly used for apartments, villas, offices, shops, clinics, restaurants, warehouses and similar rented properties.

The undertaking should not be confused with:

An ordinary clause stating that the lease has a one-year term;
A termination notice sent by the landlord;
A mediation settlement containing an agreed vacation date;
A court settlement;
An eviction decision; or
A general statement that the tenant may leave at some point in the future.

The principal distinguishing feature is that the tenant voluntarily and clearly undertakes in writing to return the property on a definite date.

Why Is an Eviction Undertaking Important?

Residential and roofed workplace tenants are strongly protected under Turkish law. A landlord cannot ordinarily terminate a fixed-term residential or roofed commercial lease merely because the initial contractual term has expired.

Unless the tenant gives timely termination notice, the agreement normally renews automatically. The landlord must generally rely on one of the statutory grounds for eviction.

A valid eviction undertaking creates an independent tenant-based ground for termination. The landlord does not have to demonstrate personal housing need, workplace need, reconstruction, repeated non-payment or completion of the ten-year extension period.

Nevertheless, the undertaking does not allow the landlord to use force or personally remove the tenant. The landlord must still use the legally recognised enforcement or court procedure.

Changing the locks, removing the tenant’s possessions or disconnecting electricity, water or natural gas is not a lawful substitute for enforcement.

Essential Validity Requirements

The validity of an eviction undertaking in Turkey depends on several cumulative requirements. Failure to satisfy one of the fundamental conditions may prevent the landlord from obtaining eviction.

The most important conditions are:

The undertaking must be in writing.
It must be issued by the tenant or an authorised representative.
It must be given after delivery of the property.
It must contain a definite eviction date.
It must represent a legally valid declaration of intent.
Where several persons are tenants, the participation of all relevant tenants must be examined.

Each condition requires separate consideration.

The Undertaking Must Be in Writing

Article 352 expressly requires a written undertaking. An oral promise by the tenant to leave on a particular date does not satisfy this special statutory form requirement.

A landlord may have witnesses who heard the tenant promise to vacate. The parties may also have discussed an evacuation date by telephone. These circumstances may be relevant to negotiations, but they do not ordinarily replace the written form required for an eviction undertaking.

The document may be handwritten or printed. The entire text does not have to be written personally by the tenant. However, the tenant’s signature must be genuine and must demonstrate acceptance of the undertaking.

Electronic communications may create complex evidentiary questions. A message sent through an ordinary messaging application should not automatically be treated as equivalent to a formally signed eviction undertaking. The identity of the sender, integrity of the communication, electronic signature rules and clarity of the statement would have to be examined.

The safest method is a separately prepared written document containing the complete undertaking and the tenant’s original signature.

Is Notarisation Mandatory?

Notarisation is not a general condition for the substantive validity of an eviction undertaking. Article 352 requires written form but does not state that the document must be executed or certified by a notary public. An ordinary written and signed undertaking may therefore be valid.

Nevertheless, notarisation can have significant procedural advantages.

A notarised document provides strong evidence regarding:

The identity of the signatory;
The signature;
The date of execution;
The content of the undertaking; and
The fact that the document existed on the certified date.

The distinction becomes particularly important if the landlord commences non-judicial enforcement proceedings and the tenant objects to the signature or date.

Where the undertaking was prepared by a notary or its signature and date were notarised, the landlord may generally have a stronger basis for seeking removal of the tenant’s objection before the enforcement court under Article 275 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law. An ordinary written document may require a full court proceeding if the tenant properly denies the signature or date.

Notarisation therefore affects proof and procedural strategy even though it is not a general validity requirement.

The Undertaking Must Be Issued by the Tenant

The person giving the undertaking should normally be the person identified as the tenant in the rental agreement.

A spouse, child, employee, roommate or other occupant who is not a party to the rental agreement cannot ordinarily terminate the tenant’s contractual right merely by signing an undertaking in their own name.

The signature must belong to the actual tenant or to a person legally authorised to act for that tenant.

Where the tenant is a company, the undertaking should be signed by the person or persons authorised to represent the legal entity. The company’s signature circular, trade registry records and representation rules should be checked.

If a representative signs on behalf of an individual tenant, the scope of the representative’s authority must be reviewed. Whether a general power of attorney is sufficient or express authority is required may depend on the document and circumstances. The safest practice is to include explicit authority to issue an eviction undertaking and surrender the rented property.

What Happens If There Is More Than One Tenant?

Where two or more persons are named as tenants, the undertaking should generally be signed by all of them.

The obligation to return possession of a single property is not easily divisible. One tenant cannot normally terminate the tenancy rights of the other contractual tenants without authority.

For example, if a husband and wife are both expressly listed as tenants in the rental agreement, an undertaking signed by only one of them may not be sufficient to obtain eviction against the other.

The same issue arises in commercial leases where several individuals or companies are jointly identified as tenants.

Judicial practice generally requires all contractual tenants to participate unless one tenant has been properly authorised to act for the others.

Landlords should therefore compare the signatures on the undertaking with the tenant section of the original rental agreement before relying on the document.

The Undertaking Must Be Given After Delivery

The most important validity requirement is that the tenant must give the undertaking after the property has been delivered.

The rule is intended to prevent landlords from forcing prospective tenants to sign away their statutory protection as a condition for receiving the keys.

A person seeking housing may have little bargaining power before possession is delivered. Turkish law therefore does not ordinarily recognise an undertaking imposed before the tenant has actually obtained the rented property.

The relevant issue is the physical and legal delivery of the premises, not merely the date written on the rental agreement.

Evidence of delivery may include:

A written delivery report;
A key-delivery receipt;
Utility subscription dates;
Building entrance records;
Bank payments;
Correspondence;
Moving records;
Address registration; and
Witness evidence, where legally admissible.

To minimise disputes, the undertaking should be executed on a clearly later date than the rental agreement and delivery report.

Is an Undertaking Signed on the Same Day as the Lease Valid?

An undertaking signed simultaneously with the original rental agreement creates a serious validity risk.

If the document was obtained before the tenant received the keys, it does not satisfy the post-delivery requirement.

Where the rental agreement and undertaking carry the same date, the landlord may face difficulty proving that delivery occurred first and the undertaking was given later.

The safest practice is to avoid executing the undertaking on the same day as the initial rental agreement. A separate document should be signed only after the tenant has received possession, and the date of delivery should be documented.

A different situation may arise where an existing tenant has already occupied the property for a substantial period and signs an undertaking during a later renewal or protocol. Because possession was delivered earlier, an undertaking signed with a renewal document is not automatically invalid merely because it is connected with the renewal. Judicial practice distinguishes an undertaking imposed at the beginning of the first lease from one issued while the tenant is already in possession.

The Eviction Date Must Be Definite

The undertaking must identify a definite date on which the property will be vacated.

Statements such as the following are likely to create uncertainty:

“I will vacate when the landlord requests.”
“I will leave after finding another property.”
“I will leave at the end of the business season.”
“I will vacate soon.”
“I will leave when the property is sold.”

The date should preferably be expressed as an exact calendar date, such as 30 September 2027.

The purpose is to allow both parties and the enforcement authorities to determine precisely when the tenant’s obligation became due and when the landlord’s one-month period began.

The Court of Cassation has rejected reliance on documents that do not contain a sufficiently clear evacuation date for the purposes of Article 352.

Can the Eviction Date Be Far in the Future?

Turkish law does not establish a general maximum period between execution of the undertaking and the promised evacuation date.

The parties may agree on an evacuation date several months or potentially longer after execution.

However, an extremely unusual date may raise factual questions regarding whether the document reflects the actual intention of the parties. The relationship between the rental period, renewal agreements and subsequent conduct should be considered.

The document should also distinguish between the execution date and the eviction date. These are not the same.

The execution date demonstrates when the undertaking was issued and whether it followed delivery. The eviction date establishes when the tenant must leave and when the one-month period for legal action begins.

Blank or Undated Eviction Undertakings

Blank eviction undertakings are among the most controversial issues in Turkish rental practice.

A landlord may ask the tenant to sign a document in which the execution date, eviction date or other sections are left blank. The landlord may later complete the missing information.

A tenant should never assume that a blank signed undertaking will automatically be treated as invalid.

The Turkish Court of Cassation’s General Assembly of Civil Chambers has accepted that a tenant alleging that a document was signed blank or before the rental relationship bears the burden of proving that allegation under the circumstances examined. In the decision numbered E. 2017/975, K. 2021/1108, the Court criticised the reversal of the burden of proof where the tenant claimed that a blank undertaking had been obtained before the lease.

Earlier Court of Cassation practice has likewise treated the signature of an incomplete document as potentially authorising later completion, unless the tenant proves that the document was completed contrary to the agreement or that another ground of invalidity exists.

This does not mean that every blank undertaking is unquestionably valid. Fraudulent completion, forgery, lack of consent, execution before delivery or filling the document contrary to the parties’ agreement may still be raised.

However, the evidentiary burden can be difficult.

For tenants, signing a blank document creates a substantial risk. For landlords, relying on a blank document also creates avoidable litigation. The execution and eviction dates should always be completed before signature.

Must the Tenant Understand the Document?

The tenant’s declaration must represent a legally valid intention.

A tenant may challenge the undertaking based on mistake, fraud, threat, coercion, lack of capacity or another defect affecting consent. However, merely stating that the legal consequences were not understood will not automatically invalidate a signed document.

This issue is particularly important for foreign tenants signing Turkish-language documents.

A bilingual version or sworn translation should be provided where the tenant does not sufficiently understand Turkish. The tenant should be given an opportunity to review the document and obtain independent legal advice.

A landlord seeking to rely on the undertaking should preserve evidence showing that the document was completed, explained and voluntarily signed.

Eviction Undertakings and Family Homes

Special difficulties may arise where the rented property is used as the family home but only one spouse is named as the tenant.

Turkish family law restricts one spouse from terminating or limiting rights concerning the family home without the other spouse’s express consent. The Turkish Code of Obligations also allows a non-tenant spouse to become a party to the rental agreement by notifying the landlord that the property is a family home.

The application of these rules to eviction undertakings has generated differing views in legal scholarship and judicial practice.

Some interpretations argue that an undertaking concerning a family residence requires the other spouse’s consent because it ultimately terminates the family’s right to occupy the home. Other decisions have rejected objections where the non-tenant spouse had not notified the landlord and acquired tenant status before the enforcement proceedings.

Accordingly, absence of the non-tenant spouse’s signature does not produce a simple and universal answer in every case.

The following distinctions are important:

If both spouses are expressly named as tenants, both should sign.
If only one spouse is the contractual tenant, the family-home status and prior notifications must be examined.
If the other spouse has formally become a party to the lease, proceedings should include that spouse.
The landlord’s knowledge of the family-home status may be relevant.
The timing of the spouse’s objection may affect the procedural assessment.

Because this area remains fact-sensitive, both landlords and tenants should obtain individual legal advice before relying on a family-home objection or an undertaking concerning the marital residence.

What Happens on the Promised Eviction Date?

The tenant must vacate the property and return legal possession on the stated date.

Simply removing personal belongings may not be sufficient if the tenant retains the keys or continues controlling access.

The parties should prepare a written handover report recording:

The date and time of delivery;
The keys returned;
Meter readings;
The condition of the property;
Outstanding rent or expenses;
The status of the security deposit; and
Any claims reserved by either party.

The landlord should issue a signed key-delivery receipt.

Where the tenant leaves without obtaining a handover document, disputes may later arise about whether possession was actually returned and whether rent continued to accrue.

The One-Month Deadline

If the tenant does not leave on the promised date, the landlord must act within one month.

Article 352/1 allows the landlord to:

Commence non-judicial enforcement proceedings; or
File an eviction lawsuit.

The one-month period begins from the agreed evacuation date. It is treated as a strict forfeiture period. Failure to take an appropriate legal step may prevent reliance on that undertaking for eviction.

For example, if the tenant undertook to vacate on 30 September, the landlord should calculate the one-month period beginning from that date and should not wait until the next rental year.

The safest approach is to commence the selected process immediately after the tenant fails to leave.

Can the One-Month Lawsuit Period Be Extended?

Article 353 of the Turkish Code of Obligations provides an important mechanism for extending the period for filing an eviction lawsuit.

If the landlord notifies the tenant in writing, no later than the end of the original filing period, that a lawsuit will be filed, the lawsuit period is deemed extended for one rental year.

Judicial decisions and legal commentary recognise the application of this mechanism to eviction based on a written undertaking.

The written notice should be sent after the promised evacuation date and within the one-month period. A premature notice sent before the evacuation obligation has become due may create legal debate and should not be relied upon without careful analysis.

The notice should clearly state that:

The tenant failed to comply with the undertaking;
The landlord intends to terminate the rental relationship;
An eviction lawsuit will be filed; and
The undertaking and property are clearly identified.

A notarial notice is usually preferable for evidentiary certainty.

Mandatory Mediation Before an Eviction Lawsuit

Since 1 September 2023, disputes arising from rental relationships are generally subject to mandatory mediation before a lawsuit is filed.

A direct eviction lawsuit based on an eviction undertaking therefore requires completion of the mandatory mediation process.

The statutory exception concerns non-judicial eviction proceedings conducted under the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law. Accordingly:

Direct eviction lawsuit: mandatory mediation applies.
Non-judicial enforcement for eviction: mandatory mediation does not apply before commencing the enforcement proceeding.

This distinction is expressly regulated by Article 18/B of the Mediation Law.

From the date of the mediation application until the final report is issued, limitation periods are suspended and forfeiture periods do not run. This rule is particularly important because eviction-undertaking claims are subject to the one-month period.

The landlord should therefore submit the mediation application within the one-month period where the direct lawsuit route is chosen.

If the parties do not settle, the final mediation report must be obtained before the lawsuit is filed. A lawsuit filed without mandatory mediation is subject to procedural dismissal.

Eviction Through Non-Judicial Enforcement

The landlord may choose the special non-judicial enforcement procedure regulated by Articles 272 and following of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law.

The application must be made within one month from the promised evacuation date. The written undertaking is submitted to the enforcement office, which issues an official eviction order.

The order generally requires the tenant to vacate and deliver the property within 15 days. The tenant may object to the eviction order within seven days of service.

If the tenant does not object and does not leave within the 15-day period, the landlord may request compulsory eviction through the enforcement office.

The landlord must not attempt to conduct the physical eviction personally. The process must be carried out by the enforcement authorities.

What Happens If the Tenant Objects?

A timely objection stops the non-judicial eviction proceeding.

The next step depends on:

Whether the undertaking is notarised;
Whether the tenant denies the signature;
Whether the tenant denies the execution or eviction date;
Whether the tenant claims that the lease was renewed;
Whether the document is an ordinary written instrument; and
The exact wording of the objection.

Where the undertaking was prepared or certified by a notary, or where the signature and date are admitted, the landlord may generally seek removal of the objection and eviction before the enforcement court.

Where the tenant properly denies the signature or date on an ordinary written undertaking, the enforcement court’s limited examination may be insufficient. The landlord may have to proceed before the Civil Court of Peace through a full eviction lawsuit, following mandatory mediation where required.

The procedural choice must be made carefully. Applying to the wrong court may cause substantial delay.

Eviction Lawsuit Before the Civil Court of Peace

The landlord may file a direct eviction lawsuit based on Article 352/1 instead of commencing enforcement proceedings.

The court with subject-matter jurisdiction is the Civil Court of Peace, known as the Sulh Hukuk Mahkemesi. The Code of Civil Procedure assigns disputes arising from rental relationships to these courts regardless of the monetary value of the dispute.

Before filing, mandatory mediation must be completed.

The landlord will generally submit:

The rental agreement;
The original eviction undertaking;
The delivery report;
Evidence of the execution date;
The mediation final report;
Any notarial notices;
Proof that the tenant remains in possession; and
Documents concerning the tenant’s objections.

The tenant may defend the case by alleging invalid execution, pre-delivery signature, forgery, lack of authority, uncertainty of the evacuation date, expiry of the filing period or a later agreement superseding the undertaking.

Common Tenant Objections

The most common objections include:

The Undertaking Was Signed Before Delivery

This is one of the strongest substantive objections where it can be proven. Article 352 expressly requires execution after delivery.

The Document Was Signed Blank

Blank signature alone may not be enough. The tenant may have to prove that the document was completed contrary to the agreement or that it was obtained before delivery.

The Signature Is Not Genuine

A genuine signature dispute may require handwriting examination and full evidentiary proceedings.

The Date Was Added Later

The legal effect depends on whether the document was voluntarily signed with blank sections, whether the landlord had authority to complete it and whether the inserted date reflects the parties’ agreement.

The Eviction Date Is Uncertain

A document that does not identify a definite or objectively determinable date may not satisfy Article 352.

The Signatory Was Not the Tenant

An undertaking signed by an unauthorised spouse, employee or occupant may be ineffective against the contractual tenant.

Not All Tenants Signed

Where several persons are contractual tenants, the absence of one tenant’s signature may prevent eviction against the entire tenancy.

The One-Month Period Was Missed

The court examines the evacuation date, date of enforcement or lawsuit, written notices and mediation period.

The Undertaking Was Withdrawn or Superseded

The tenant may argue that the parties later expressly cancelled the undertaking or concluded a new agreement inconsistent with enforcement.

Does Accepting Rent After the Eviction Date Cancel the Undertaking?

Acceptance of rent after the promised evacuation date does not automatically produce the same result in every case.

The legal effect depends on:

The rental period covered by the payment;
Whether the landlord reserved the right to seek eviction;
Whether the payment was accepted as occupation compensation;
Whether the parties expressly renewed the lease;
Subsequent written agreements; and
The landlord’s conduct.

A clear later agreement extending or renewing the rental relationship may affect the enforceability of an earlier undertaking. However, merely accepting money while pursuing timely legal remedies does not necessarily amount to waiver.

Landlords should place an express reservation on post-date payments where eviction is still intended.

Tenants should not assume that payment alone has cancelled the undertaking unless the parties have reached a clear written agreement.

Can the Undertaking Be Cancelled?

The parties may mutually cancel or replace the undertaking.

Cancellation should be made in writing to avoid later disputes. The document should identify the original undertaking and state clearly that it will no longer be enforced.

The tenant should obtain the original document or written confirmation of cancellation.

A verbal statement by the landlord that the undertaking “will not be used” may be difficult to prove.

Where a new rental protocol is signed, it should state expressly whether the existing undertaking remains valid, is postponed or is cancelled.

Legal Consequences of a Valid Undertaking

A valid eviction undertaking creates a specific obligation to surrender the property on the promised date.

If the tenant fails to comply and the landlord acts within the statutory period, the tenant may face:

Non-judicial eviction proceedings;
A court-ordered eviction;
Enforcement expenses;
Legal fees;
Continued rent or occupation compensation;
Claims for unpaid utilities and common expenses; and
Damage claims where the property was not returned properly.

The security deposit is a separate issue. Eviction does not automatically entitle the landlord to keep the entire deposit.

The deposit may be applied only to legitimate claims such as unpaid rent, expenses for which the tenant is responsible and damage beyond ordinary wear and tear.

Practical Recommendations for Landlords

A landlord should never rely on a poorly prepared template.

The undertaking should be signed after documented delivery, contain both the execution and evacuation dates and include the signatures of every contractual tenant.

A notarial document should be considered where the value of the property or likelihood of dispute is high.

The original document must be preserved. A copy may not always provide the same evidentiary and enforcement advantages.

The landlord should record the promised date in a deadline system and take action immediately if the tenant does not leave.

Before selecting enforcement or litigation, the landlord should examine whether the signature and date are likely to be disputed.

Practical Recommendations for Tenants

A tenant should never sign a blank or undated undertaking.

The document should not be signed before receiving the property.

The tenant should retain a complete signed copy showing every date and clause.

Foreign tenants should request a translation and obtain legal advice before signing.

Where several persons are tenants, each person should understand the effect of the document.

If an enforcement order is received, the tenant must act quickly. The objection period is short, and failure to object may allow compulsory eviction.

A tenant alleging forgery, pre-delivery execution or unauthorised completion should preserve all written evidence, including messages, emails, delivery reports and dated copies.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is an eviction undertaking valid without a notary?

Yes. Ordinary written form may be sufficient. Notarisation is not a general validity requirement, but it provides significant evidentiary and procedural advantages.

Can the undertaking be signed with the rental agreement?

An undertaking imposed before or simultaneously with initial delivery may be invalid. It should be executed only after the tenant has received the property.

Must the document include an exact date?

Yes. The evacuation obligation must relate to a definite date.

Is a blank signed undertaking automatically invalid?

No. Court of Cassation practice may place the burden on the tenant to prove unauthorised or improper completion.

How long does the landlord have to act?

The landlord must generally commence enforcement or file the appropriate action within one month from the promised evacuation date.

Is mediation compulsory?

Mediation is compulsory before a direct eviction lawsuit. It is not required before commencing the special non-judicial eviction proceeding under the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law.

How long does the tenant have to object to an eviction order?

The tenant generally has seven days from service to object. The order ordinarily grants 15 days to vacate.

Which court hears a direct lawsuit?

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

Must all tenants sign?

Where several persons are contractual tenants, all should generally sign unless one has valid authority to act for the others.

Is the spouse’s signature always required?

Not in every situation. The answer depends on whether the spouse is a contractual tenant, whether the property is a family home and whether the spouse acquired tenant status through the statutory notification mechanism.

Conclusion

An eviction undertaking in Turkey is a powerful but highly technical instrument.

Its effectiveness depends on compliance with strict validity requirements. The undertaking must be written, issued by the tenant or an authorised representative, given after delivery and connected to a definite evacuation date.

The timing requirement is equally important. If the tenant does not leave, the landlord must act within one month by commencing enforcement or pursuing the appropriate court procedure.

A direct lawsuit requires mandatory mediation, while the special non-judicial enforcement route is exempt from that prerequisite.

Notarisation is not compulsory, but it may significantly strengthen the landlord’s position where the tenant later disputes the signature or date.

Blank and undated documents create serious risks for both parties. Although a tenant may challenge unauthorised completion, Court of Cassation practice shows that proving such allegations may be difficult.

The status of multiple tenants, companies, representatives and family residences must also be examined before proceedings begin.

Landlords should ensure that every formal and procedural requirement is satisfied before relying on an undertaking. Tenants should understand that signing such a document may lead to compulsory eviction even where rent has always been paid on time.

Because a missed deadline or defective document can determine the entire outcome, eviction undertakings should be reviewed individually by a Turkish rental law attorney before execution, objection, mediation or enforcement.

Legal Disclaimer: This article provides general information regarding eviction undertakings in Turkey and does not constitute legal advice. Each dispute must be assessed according to the rental agreement, delivery date, execution and evacuation dates, signatures, family-home status, notices, mediation records and applicable procedural deadlines.

Categories:

Genel