Landlord-Tenant Precedent: Tenant’s Eviction Overturned

A Landmark Decision in Landlord-Tenant Dispute: Eviction Case Overturned

Disputes between landlords and tenants have been on the rise in recent years, but thanks to the mediation system that came into effect on September 1, many disputes can now be resolved without resorting to litigation. In the event of a dispute, either the landlord or tenant can file a lawsuit.

In a recent case, a new landlord declared that he would be moving into the rented property “due to necessity” and demanded that the tenant vacate the premises. However, the tenant was unable to find a new home during the stipulated period and continued to reside in the house. Subsequently, the landlord took the matter to court and filed an eviction lawsuit. However, the court’s decision was quite unexpected.

It was revealed in court that the owner of the property actually owned 5 other houses in Istanbul. This fact played a crucial role in the court’s decision-making process. The case was widely followed, and the tenant’s lawyer, Gizem Gonce, provided details about the dispute and the subsequent legal proceedings. Gonce emphasized the following key points during her statements:

“Our client has been a tenant in the same house for about 10 years, and has consistently paid rent. Subsequently, the homeowner decided to sell the house, and the new owner sent a notice demanding that the tenant vacate the property to make room for the new owner’s residence.”

In response, Gonce stated that “This is already a legal situation. The new owner must provide a notice within 1 month if they intend to move into the property. The tenant did not leave the premises due to the inability to find a suitable home for themselves.”

The new landlord filed an eviction lawsuit on the grounds of necessity, claiming that they needed to live in the property due to its close proximity to their children’s school. However, it was discovered in court that the new landlord owned 5 other flats across Istanbul, all of which were currently occupied by tenants.

Despite the property’s proximity to the children’s school, the court questioned why the landlord sought to evict the tenant from the newly purchased property, and not from any of the other properties owned. As a result, the court ruled against the eviction, deeming the landlord’s claim insincere and unfounded.

Cases of eviction due to necessity often lead to judges ordering the evacuation of the property if a genuine need is proven. However, the recent case highlights the requirement for the need to be sincere and substantiated.

The crucial takeaway from this case is that individuals purchasing new properties with the intention of living in them should have genuine reasons and no other suitable residence. This significantly increases the chances of winning an eviction case. On the other hand, using this as a pretext to evict a tenant, without honest intentions, is more likely to be rejected by the courts, which prioritize the protection of tenants’ rights.

Source: Milliyet.com.tr

 

This message was taken from this source and rewritten by artificial intelligence.