325 of the Code of Obligations. according to its article, if the tenant leaves the house before the expiration of the period specified in the lease agreement, the tenant will be liable for the rental money for a reasonable period of time, that is, for the damage of the landlord, until the house is rented again. The purpose of the reasonable period is the period during which the house can be rented in normal conditions. The property of the house, its location, etc. it is important. For example, if the tenant signs a 1-year lease agreement and leaves the house at the end of 9 months, as a rule, he is responsible for the rent of the remaining 3 months. But if the house is available for rent within 1 month due to its location and property, the tenant will only be responsible for the amount of rent for 1 month. As a matter of fact, both according to the Code of Obligations and according to the application of the Supreme Court, the tenant is obliged to pay all the damages suffered by the landlord until the end of the lease period. The landlord’s loss consists of the rental money for the period when the house remains empty from the date of eviction until the date when the tenant can be re-rented on the same conditions.
The tenant may leave the house by giving written notice to the landlord at least 15 days before the end of the fixed-term rental period. (Article 347 of the Code of Obligations) The notification is valid only if it is made in writing. (Article 348 of the Code of Obligations)
If the tenant has not informed the landlord that he will leave the house at least 15 days before the end of the lease agreement, the lease agreement is considered extended for one year with the same conditions.
But the landlord cannot terminate the contract based on the expiration of the contract period. The landlord may only remove the tenant from the house by terminating the contract at the end of the 10-year extension period without giving any reason, provided that the tenant is notified at least three months before the end of each extension year following this period.
In indefinite-term lease agreements, the tenant can always terminate the lease agreement, if the landlord is ten years after the beginning of the lease. In cases where the right of termination may be exercised in accordance with the general provisions, the lessor or lessee may terminate the contract.
3.LEGAL DEPARTMENT 2017/782 E. , 2017/256 K.
“text of jurisprudence”
COURT : MAGISTRATE’S COURT
As a result of the case for the cancellation of the appeal between the parties, the court issued a Decision ……. … The case file on the decision to resist, which was issued upon the deterioration of his apartment, is 02…..article 45 of the Law No. 6763, which entered into force in 2016. temporary …/…. added to HMK No. 6100 by article …/…. according to the article, it was sent to our Apartment by the General Assembly, but the papers in the file were read and considered necessary:
Upon appeal of the decision of the local court by the defendant, … …. 05.03.2015 … 2015/596 by day, based on Decision No. 2015/2283 expert examination of the surveyor found by ref with the addition of a reasonable period of the date of the evacuation of the tenant responsible for rent until the date to be achieved with a reasonable amount of time should be made while the file received on money, not enough expert to decide, according to the report of the provision on the grounds that the establishment is not correct, it was decided to corruption.
According to the court, the reasonable period for renting real estate after eviction is two months, the defendant’s real estate ….on 02.2010, it was stated that a decision should be made to partially accept the case on the grounds of eviction and a decision was made to resist overturning it.
The decision to resist was appealed by the defendant within the time limit and our department was required to comply with Article 45 of Law No. 6763. temporary …/…. added to HMK No. 6100 by article …/…. in accordance with the article, it is understood that there is a right to examine first, but the file was examined, and it was discussed and considered as necessary.
THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
… …. … IN HIS APARTMENT “ IF THE TENANT EVICTS THE TENANT BY UNILATERALLY TERMINATING THE LEASE AGREEMENT BEFORE THE EXPIRATION OF THE LEASE PERIOD, AS A RULE, THE TENANT IS OBLIGED TO PAY ALL DAMAGES INCURRED BY THE LESSOR UNTIL THE END OF THE LEASE PERIOD. HOWEVER, TBK NO. 6098.114th. ARTICLE 818 (BK.NUN 98.ARTICLE 52 OF THE SAME LAW AS SENDING).ITEM (REPEALED BK.NUN 44. IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 1), THE LESSOR SHOULD ALSO NOT CAUSE AN INCREASE IN THE LOSS. IN THIS CASE, THE PLAINTIFF’S LOSS CONSISTS OF RENTAL MONEY FOR THE PERIOD WHEN IT REMAINS VACANT FROM THE DATE OF EVICTION UNTIL THE DATE WHEN THE TENANT CAN BE RE-RENTED ON THE SAME CONDITIONS. THEREFORE, THE PLACE RENTED BY THE COURT HAS THE SAME PRICE AND
HOW SOON CAN IT BE RENTED ON THE TERMS, IF YOU FIND OUT THROUGH AN EXPERT AT YOUR LOCAL
BY DETERMINING, THE COMPENSATION THAT THE TENANT MUST PAY SHOULD BE DETERMINED, LIMITED TO THE SPECIFIED PERIOD. IF THE LESSOR MAKES THE NECESSARY EFFORTS, WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE TYPE, CHARACTERISTICS, LOCATION OF THE LESSOR, THE DEGREE OF NEED FOR A REAL ESTATE OF THIS NATURE IN THAT REGION AND OTHER OTHER CHARACTERISTICS SPECIFIC TO THE CONCRETE EVENT, IT SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY A REPORT SUITABLE FOR THE SUPERVISION OF THE LESSOR WITHIN THE SAME PERIOD OF TIME THAT THE LESSOR CAN RENT THE LESSOR AGAIN WITH THE SAME CONDITIONS, WHAT IS THE REASONABLE PERIOD REQUIRED FOR RE-LEASING WITH THE SAME CONDITIONS, IN THE SAME WORDS, WHAT IS THE REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME REQUIRED FOR RE-LEASING WITH THE SAME CONDITIONS. ACCORDING TO THE EXPERT REPORT OBTAINED FROM THE FILE, WHICH IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO MAKE A DECISION, WHILE THE TENANT SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RENT MONEY FOR A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME UNTIL THE DATE TO BE REACHED BY ADDING THE REASONABLE PERIOD FOUND BY THE EXPERT BY EXAMINING THE COURT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE-MENTIONED PRINCIPLES TO THE DATE OF EVICTION, AGAINST THE DECISION TO OVERTURN IT ON THE GROUNDS THAT ”IT IS NOT CORRECT TO ESTABLISH A PROVISION ACCORDING TO THE EXPERT REPORT RECEIVED FROM THE FILE;
ACCORDING TO THE COURT, “THE DEFENDANT IS A TENANT IN THE REAL ESTATE BELONGING TO THE PLAINTIFF. IF THE TENANT HAS EVICTED THE PROPERTY, THE REASONABLE PERIOD FOR THE RENTAL TO BE GRANTED BY THE LESSOR AFTER THE REAL ESTATE HAS BEEN EVICTED IS A PERIOD OF TWO MONTHS. THE ALMIGHTY HAS ACCEPTED THIS PERIOD IN MANY OF HIS DECISIONS. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE REAL ESTATE SUBJECT TO THE LAWSUIT EVICTED ITS TENANTS IN February 2010. IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE DEFENDANT HAS EVICTED THE PROPERTY AS OF /02/2010. IN OTHER WORDS, IT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED THAT THE REASONABLE PERIOD REQUIRED FOR THE RE-LEASE IS A PERIOD OF TWO MONTHS, AS LONG AS IT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRACTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT… Dec. THE PERIOD BETWEEN THE DATE OF THE TENANT’S EVICTION AND THE DATE WHEN HE CAN RE-LEASE THE LEASEHOLDER ON THE SAME CONDITIONS. AS OF THIS PERIOD, THE NECESSARY CALCULATIONS HAVE BEEN DEPOSITED WITH EXPERT EXPERTS ON THE FILE TO BE MADE, THE EXPERT EXPERT COMMITTEE HAS MADE THE NECESSARY CALCULATIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS ASPECT AND SUBMITTED ITS REPORT, THE MAIN MONEY ….IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE INTEREST RECEIVABLE THAT HAS PROCESSED TL 805.50 HAS ALSO BEEN CALCULATED AS TL 315.54. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS ACCEPTED THIS TWO-MONTH PERIOD AS TWO MONTHS, AS INDICATED IN MANY OF ITS DECISIONS. ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS RESISTED BY THE EXPERT EXPERT COUNCIL ON THE GROUNDS THAT ”IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THIS PERIOD IS TWO MONTHS.
IN CASE OF EARLY RELEASE, AS A RULE, 325 OF THE TURKISH CODE OF OBLIGATIONS. ACCORDING TO THE ARTICLE, THE LESSEE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RENTAL PRICE UNTIL THE KEY DELIVERY DATE, AND FROM THE KEY DELIVERY DATE, THE LESSEE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RENTAL PRICE FOR A REASONABLE PERIOD DURING WHICH THE LESSEE WILL BE RENTED ON THE SAME TERMS. HOWEVER, ARTICLE 112 OF THE TURKISH CODE OF OBLIGATIONS (ARTICLE 96 OF THE CODE OF OBLIGATIONS.) 52 OF THE SAME LAW AS THE SUBMISSION. (TALK. IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 44), THE PLAINTIFF MUST MAKE EFFORTS TO RE-RENT THIS PLACE TO THE LESSOR, SO THAT HE DOES HIS PART TO PREVENT AN INCREASE IN DAMAGE. IN THIS CASE, THE PLAINTIFF’S LOSS CONSISTS OF THE RENTAL MONEY FOR THE PERIOD WHEN IT REMAINS VACANT FROM THE DATE OF EVICTION UNTIL THE DATE WHEN THE TENANT CAN BE RE-RENTED ON THE SAME CONDITIONS. ALTHOUGH THE DECISION WAS OVERTURNED ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE REASONABLE TIME WAS DETERMINED BY A REPORT FAVORABLE TO THE AUDIT OF THE APPELLANT, SINCE THE APPELLANT’S ADJECTIVE AND THE PROGRESS OF THE FILE WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, THE RE-EXPERT REVIEW
IT CAN BE UNDERSTOOD FROM THE EXAMINATION THAT THIS WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE FILING, THE REJECTION OF ALL APPEALS BY THE DEFENDANT’S ATTORNEY WHO IS NOT IN PLACE, AS WELL AS THE PROVISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURE AND LAW NO. 6763 OF LAW 45. TEMPORARY …/…. ADDED TO HMK NO. 6100 BY ARTICLE …/…. TO BE APPROVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ARTICLE, 195.00.TL ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 440/III-… OF THE CMB, THE WAY TO CORRECT THE DECISION IS CLOSED, SO THAT THE BALANCE APPEAL FEE IS CHARGED TO THE APPELLANT…..IT WAS DECIDED UNANIMOUSLY ON 01.2017.
(CLOSED) 6. LEGAL DEPARTMENT 2016/9799 E. , 2016/6337 K.
“text of jurisprudence”
The decision on the case of receivables with the date and number written above, which was issued from the local court, was appealed by the defendant within the time limit, but all the papers in the file were read and discussed and considered as necessary.
The case is related to the claim for collection of electricity and natural gas consumption costs and the lease receivable that was deprived due to the early release filed by the lessor. The court decided to partially accept the case, collect 15.468,44-TL, and the verdict was appealed by the defendant.
The plaintiff’s attorney filed a petition; The real estate belonging to the plaintiff was leased to the defendant with a contract dated 25.12.2008 and for a period of 2 years, the rental price for 2012 was set at 2,500.00TL, the defendant vacated the real estate without informing him on August / 2012, so the real estate remained empty for a long time and could not receive rental income, the contract 18.September August, 2012 According to this provision, it was decided that the remaining months of rent will be muaccel if the tenant evicts the property before the expiration of the term, November October and November, the total amount of the rent was 10.000,00-TL and the accumulated 3.812, 23-TL electricity and 1.938, 77-TL natural gas bill, which had to be paid by him, 15.751,00-TL with the legal interest that you will receive, has requested collection together with the legal interest. The court decided to partially accept the case because it is fixed that the defendant is responsible for the rent fees not paid and the electricity and natural gas prices paid by the plaintiff since the obligor subject to the case evicted the plaintiff without requesting termination.
1-According to the scope of the file, the evidence collected, the existing evidence has been decided by the court in appreciation and there is no inaccuracy in the event that the defendant’s other appeals that fall outside the scope of the following paragraphs are not in place.
2-dominated early release due to an appeal of the defendant’s objections as to the rent reasonable time, depending on the case and the provision is based on 25.12.2008 start, there is no dispute between the parties dated 24 months term on a lease agreement. 18 of the lease agreement. although there is an arrangement in the article that if the tenant evicts the property before the expiration of the period, the remaining months of rent will be muaccel; As a rule, if the lessee evicts the lessee by unilaterally terminating the lease agreement before the expiration of the lease period, the lessee is obliged to pay all damages incurred by the lessee by the end of the lease period. However, 114 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098. article 818 (BK.nun 98.article 52 of the same Law as sending).item (repealed BK.nun 44. according to Article 1), the lessor should also not cause an increase in the loss. This is stated in Article 325 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098. In the article: ”If the lessee returns the leasehold without complying with the term of the contract or the termination period, the debts arising from the lease agreement shall continue for a reasonable period of time during which the lessee may be rented on similar terms …” has been provided by saying. In this case, the plaintiff’s loss consists of rental money for the period when it remains vacant from the date of eviction until the date when the tenant can be re-rented on the same conditions. After the eviction, it is necessary to determine the amount of rent money that the tenant is responsible for, while it is not correct to decide on the partial acceptance of the case in writing without conducting an exploration and expert examination in the neighborhood.
The provision must be overturned for these reasons.
CONCLUSION: HMK No. 6100 with the acceptance of the defendant’s appeals for reasons written in paragraph 2 above.or temporary 3, which was added by Law No. 6217.according to the provisions of the article, HUMK.of 428.according to the article, the violation of the provision, the refund of the appeal fee received in advance upon request to the appellant, was decided by a majority vote on 02/11/2016.
(M)
POST, VOTE AGAINST:
There is no dispute between the parties regarding the lease agreement dated Dec. 25.12.2008 and for a period of 24 months. Special terms of the contract 18.the article contains the provision ”If the tenant evicts before the expiration of the period, the remaining months of rent will be muaccel”. Such a decision is a criminal requirement and is valid. Since the parties have decided that the remaining months of rent will be exempt in case of early termination, I cannot agree with the majority’s decision to overturn, as I think that the decision should be upheld, since there is no failure to rule on the months of rent requested by the court.
6.DEPARTMENT OF LAW 2016/931 E. , 2016/2494 K.
“text of jurisprudence”
COURT : Magistrate’s Court
TYPE OF CASE : Cancellation of the appeal and refund of the deposit
The decision on the cancellation of the appeal written above and the decision on the refund of the deposit issued by the local court, has been appealed by the plaintiff-counter-defendant and the defendant-counter-plaintiff within the time limit, but all the papers in the file have been read and discussed and considered as necessary.
The main case concerns the cancellation of the appeal against the enforcement proceedings for the purpose of collecting the rent receivable deprived due to early release, the counterclaim is about requesting the refund of the deposit amount.
The court decided to partially accept the original case, cancel the appeal over TL 1350, dismiss the counter-case, and the judgment was appealed by the plaintiff (counter-defendant) and the defendants’ (counter-plaintiff) deputy.
temporary 3 added by Law No. 1-6100 …or No. 6217.according to the provisions of the article, HUMK.427 as amended by law No. 5219 of 21.07.2004. article 19 of the law No. 5236. according to the revaluation rate in accordance with Article 4 added to the Code of Civil Procedure and in accordance with the October 9-82 of 02.03.2005 of the General Assembly of the Supreme Court of Law and decision No. 126, the subject of appeal will receive 1,890 on the date of the provision.-REFUSAL of the appeal request of the defendants’ attorney (counter-plaintiffs) due to the fact that the judgment is final because it is below TL,
2-As for the appeals of the plaintiff (counter-defendant) that his/her attorney will receive a reasonable amount of rent due to early release;
As a rule, if the lessee evicts the lessee by unilaterally terminating the lease agreement before the expiration of the lease period, the lessee is obliged to pay all damages incurred by the lessee by the end of the lease period. However, TBK No. 6098.114th. article 818 (BK.nun 98.article 52 of the same Law as sending).item (repealed BK.nun 44. according to Article 1), the lessor should also not cause an increase in the loss. This is stated in Article 325 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098. In the article: ”If the lessee returns the leasehold without complying with the term of the contract or the termination period, the debts arising from the lease agreement shall continue for a reasonable period of time during which the lessee may be rented on similar terms …” has been provided by saying. In this case, the plaintiff’s loss consists of rental money for the period when it remains vacant from the date of eviction until the date when the tenant can be re-rented on the same conditions. However, the tenant’s liability is limited by the lease term.
There is no dispute between the parties regarding the lease agreement dated 07/15/2011 and for a period of 1 year, which is based on the case and is based on the provision, and the early Decommissioning of the lessor. Plaintiff’s original case of loans in the period from the date of the evacuation at the end of the five-month lease receivable on an expert witness by the court of appeal of the Supreme Court to request withdrawal without investigation takdiren 2 months rent reasonable time in accordance with the practice states that if the judge of the matters which should be determined by expert assessment of the right appreciation of the determination is not possible. The work to be done by the court consists in determining the reasonable time through an expert witness. However, this time …. According to the decision No. 2013/391 E-1155 of the Magistrate’s Court, it is not correct to make a decision in writing, while a decision should be made according to the result, pending the finalization of the decision of this file.
3-As for the plaintiff’s (counter-defendant’s) appeals against the power of attorney fee ruled in the counterclaim;
Since the counterclaim filed by the defendant (counter-plaintiff) tenant has been rejected, the court should rule on the power of attorney fee in favor of the plaintiff (counter-defendant) tenant, while it is also not correct to rule on the power of attorney fee in favor of the defendant (counter-plaintiff) in writing.
The provision must therefore be overturned.
CONCLUSION: Refusal of the defendant’s (counter-plaintiff’s) attorney’s appeal for the reasons described in paragraph (1) above, acceptance of the plaintiff’s (counter-defendant’s) appeals for the reasons described in paragraphs (2) and (3), temporary 3 added by Law No. 6100 …or 6217.according to the provisions of the article, HUMK.of 428.according to the article, the VIOLATION of the provision, the refund of the appeal fee received in advance upon request to the appellants, was unanimously decided on 29/03/2016.
You can read our articles and petition examples by clicking here.