In its decision dated September 10, 2025 (“Decision”), the Cassation Court’s General Assembly of Civil Chambers (“GACC”) ruled by a majority vote that owners retain a legal interest in filing a lawsuit for the correction of land shares even after the building on the property has been demolished and the property has reverted to land status. The GACC further held that the merits of the case must be decided by examining the factors necessitating the correction of land shares as of the date the construction servitude (kat irtifakı) was established.

This Decision is significant as it challenges the previously prevailing legal doctrine, which held that a lawsuit for the correction of land shares must be initiated prior to the termination of the condominium ownership (kat mülkiyeti) or construction servitude.

Decision and Reasoning of the Court of First Instance

The lawsuit examined by the Court of First Instance is a common practice, typically seen prior to urban transformation processes. It involves claims by certain apartment owners who, despite having physically larger units or units with more favorable locations and features, hold lower land shares.

The defendants requested the dismissal of the case, arguing that the building was constructed in 1967, that no owner had requested a correction for approximately 50 years, and that experts could not accurately examine the physical status of a building as it existed half a century ago.

The Court of First Instance ruled in favor of the claimants, ordering the correction of the land shares which had been distributed equally at the time of the establishment of the condominium ownership, after considering the location, value, architectural features, and various other attributes of the units.

Decision and Reasoning of the Court of Appeals

Following an appeal filed by a successor who acquired an independent unit from one of the defendants, the Court of Appeals ruled that pursuant to Article 47/1 of the Condominium Law, condominium ownership terminates automatically if the main structure is completely destroyed. The court concluded that since the building was demolished while the appeal was pending, the lawsuit had lost its subject matter (konusuz kalma), and therefore, there was no need to render a judgment on the merits.

Decision and Reasoning of the 5th Civil Chamber of the Cassation Court

The 5th Civil Chamber of the Cassation Court overturned the Court of Appeals’ decision. It stated that although the main structure was demolished, no new construction servitude or condominium ownership had been established through the mutual will of the parties with newly determined land shares. Consequently, the plaintiff still maintains a legal interest in pursuing the correction of land shares. The Chamber emphasized that the court must investigate whether grounds for reorganization exist and render a verdict accordingly.

The Court of Appeals’ Resistance Decision

The Court of Appeals issued a “resistance decision” (direnme kararı), reiterating that condominium ownership ends automatically upon the destruction of the structure under Article 47/1. It argued that correcting the registry is merely an administrative act. Furthermore, under Law No. 6306 (The Disaster Risk Law), if stakeholders decide to rebuild on the land, the configuration of the new building and its land shares depend on the agreement between the stakeholders and the contractor. The court suggested that a contrary view would prolong the urban transformation process in disaster-risk areas.

The Decision of the General Assembly of Civil Chambers

The GACC, reviewing the file following the Court of Appeals resistance, noted that the property was demolished on 21 August 2020, during the appeal process. The GACC focused on whether the demolition of a structure during litigation renders a lawsuit for the correction of land shares moot.

The GACC noted that while a case may lose its subject matter in instances such as the payment of a debt or the eviction of a property, a case is only considered moot if neither party retains a legal interest in a judgment on the merits.

In its evaluation of the concrete case, the GACC stated:

• Although the structure was demolished, new land shares have not been established by the parties.
• Upon demolition, condominium owners become co-owners of the resulting land based on their existing land shares under the principles of joint ownership (paylı mülkiyet).
• Therefore, the plaintiff retains a legal interest, and the case is not moot.

Consequently, the GACC ruled that an additional expert report must be obtained to analyze all factors (positive or negative) affecting the value of the independent units as of the date the construction servitude was established, to determine if a reorganization of land shares is required.

Conclusion

The prevailing view in land share correction cases was that the demolition of the structure removed the physical and legal basis of the lawsuit. However, this GACC Decision clarifies that the demolition of the main structure does not eliminate the legal interest of a plaintiff claiming that their land share should have been higher based on the original characteristics of their unit. This Decision is a landmark ruling in establishing that demolition alone does not extinguish the right to seek a fair redistribution of land shares.