Tenants and Homeowners: Evidence Warning from the Court of Cassation
Official titleCourt of Cassation (Yargıtay) 3rd Civil Chamber Decisions
These are four separate reversal decisions on statutory grounds rendered by the 3rd Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, encompassing eviction and return-of-deposit lawsuits concerning lease contracts, as well as compensation disputes based on defective services.
Details of the Regulation
In the first decision, it was found to be procedurally improper for the 1st Civil Court of Peace of Marmaris to dismiss the eviction lawsuit without definitively determining the legal character of the property (whether it was a field or a residence/roofed workplace). By rendering a judgment without determining the legal character of the property, the court left unclear which provisions of the Law of Leases would apply.
In the second decision rendered by the Civil Court of Peace of Yatağan, it was emphasized that, where the existence of a written lease contract and the lease relationship could not be proven, the court should have relied on oath evidence. It was stated that the burden of proof lay with the lessor and that deciding the case following an incomplete examination was procedurally improper.
In the third decision of the 1st Civil Court of Peace of Gaziantep, it was considered important to determine who bore the obligation to return the deposit where the property had been sold and the new owner had become a party to the lease contract. Unless the new owner was proven to have assumed the deposit, the former owner’s return obligation would continue.
Finally, in the decision of the 7th Consumer Court of İzmir, the issue of against whom adversary standing should be established in the compensation lawsuit concerning the loss arising from defective fuel delivery was discussed. It was determined that the dealership, as the provider of the service, bore responsibility and that the court had rendered an erroneous decision by disregarding the company’s liability.
Questions You Might Have
- What happens to the deposit I paid when the property is sold?
- As a rule, unless it is proven that the new owner has assumed the deposit, the return obligation continues to rest with the former owner.
- How can I prove that I am the tenant if there is no lease contract?
- Even if there is no written contract, if the other evidence is insufficient, proof may be sought by requesting that the court offer the opposing party the opportunity to take an oath.
Key Terms
- Kanun Yararına Bozma
- A type of review conducted to determine whether local court decisions are contrary to law.
- Husumet
- The question of against which party (person or institution) a lawsuit should be filed.
- İspat Yükü
- The burden of proving the accuracy of an alleged event.
Where we posted this
Follow Turkish legal developments
REGAS analyzed all 32 items in the Official Gazette of 1 September 2026; we published only 1 of them here.
REGAS summarizes every change in the Turkish Official Gazette in plain language and notifies you.
The REGAS app is currently Turkish-only. If you would like English in the app, the best way to make it happen is to support the developer: get the app and just say so.
REGAS Commentary
These decisions contain precedent findings that guide local courts, particularly in lease-law disputes, on matters such as the burden of proof, the correct determination of the legal character of a property, and the transfer of obligations upon a change in ownership, while preventing citizens from being deprived of their rights.