Challenging a Resolution of the Condominium Owners' Meeting in Türkiye: Notice, Quorum, Proxies, Time Limits and the Annulment Action Under KMK 33

How do you challenge a resolution of the condominium owners' meeting in Türkiye? Under Article 33(1) of the Condominium Law No. 634, an owner who attended the meeting and voted against the resolution may file an annulment action within one month of the date of the resolution, and an owner who did not attend may file within one month of learning of it and in any case within six months of its date, before the court of peace (sulh mahkemesi) where the building is located. For resolutions regarded as non-existent or absolutely null, the same paragraph provides that no time condition applies, and Article 18/B(1)(c) of the Mediation Law requires an application to a mediator before a dispute arising from the Condominium Law is filed, so the cautious course is to apply to the mediation office first.

This guide is written for foreign owners of flats in Türkiye. It follows the text of the Law and does not describe court practice or tax.

1. What Does the Owners' Meeting Decide, and Where Does the Management Plan Fit In?

The owners' meeting runs the building within the limits of the Law and the management plan (yönetim planı). Article 27 of the Condominium Law No. 634 (Kat Mülkiyeti Kanunu, KMK) provides that the main property is managed by the owners' meeting and that the form of management is decided by that meeting, subject to the mandatory provisions of the law (kanunların emredici hükümleri saklı kalmak şartiyle). Article 32(1) adds that the property is managed according to decisions taken under the contract, the management plan and the provisions of the Law.

Under Article 32(2), all owners and their universal and singular successors, the manager and the auditors are bound to comply with the resolutions of the owners' meeting. This is why the time limits in Article 33 matter: the duty to comply reaches successors who buy a flat later.

The management plan is the building's own rulebook. Article 28(1) provides that it regulates the form of management, the purpose and manner of use, the fees of the manager and the auditors and other management matters, and that it has the character of a contract binding all owners (bütün kat maliklerini bağlıyan bir sözleşme hükmündedir). Where the plan is silent, Article 28(2) refers disputes arising from the management of the property to the Law and the general provisions.

Amending the plan requires the votes of four fifths of all owners, and the same paragraph reserves the owners' right to apply to court under Article 33 (Article 28(3)). A resolution is therefore read against the plan as well as against the Law, and an owner considering a challenge should start by obtaining a copy of the plan.

2. How Must the Owners' Meeting Be Called?

The Law fixes when the annual meeting is held and sets a written notice procedure for meetings called for an important reason. Article 29(1) provides that the owners' meeting meets at least once a year, at the times shown in the management plan or, if no time is shown, within the first month of each calendar year. For housing estates (toplu yapı), the same paragraph provides that the boards meet at least once every two years, at the times shown in the management plan or, if none is shown, within the first month of the second calendar year.

Article 29(2) covers extraordinary meetings. If an important reason arises, the meeting may be convened at any time at the request of the manager, the auditor or one third of the owners, by a call signed by all owners or by registered letter, sent at least fifteen days before the requested date and stating the reason for the meeting. The fifteen-day rule is written for this case; for the annual meeting, check what the management plan says about the form and timing of the call. Unless the management plan provides otherwise, calling the meeting is one of the manager's duties (Article 35(k)).

Article 29(3) requires the first call to state where and when a second meeting will be held if the quorum is not reached at the first one, and provides that at least seven days must be left between the first and second meetings. Article 30(2) adds that the second meeting is held no later than fifteen days after the first.

3. Quorum, Votes and Proxies: Who Decides at the Meeting?

Article 30(1) provides that the meeting convenes with more than half of the owners by number and by land share (sayı ve arsa payı bakımından yarısından fazlasiyle) and decides by majority of votes (oy çokluğuyla). If the first meeting cannot be held for lack of a quorum, the decision quorum at the second meeting is an absolute majority of those attending (katılanların salt çoğunluğu; Article 30(2)).

Under Article 31(1), each owner has one vote, regardless of the size of the land share. An owner of several units has a vote for each unit but may not hold more than one third of all votes (Article 31(2)). Co-owners of one unit are represented by one of them holding their proxy (Article 31(3)). An owner directly concerned by the decision may attend the discussion but may not vote (Article 31(4)).

Article 31(5) is the provision for an owner who cannot travel to the meeting: an owner may cast the vote through an authorised representative (yetkili vekil). No one may be appointed as proxy to cast more than five per cent of the votes, and in condominium properties of forty or fewer (the text reads kırk ve daha az sayıdaki kat mülkiyetine tâbi taşınmazlarda) one person may act as proxy for no more than two people. Article 31 does not set a form for the proxy document; check the management plan, and give the proxy in writing, naming the meeting, its date and the agenda items it covers.

4. Which Decisions Need a Special Majority or Unanimity?

Article 30(1) sets the general rule, and Article 30(3) keeps in force the separate thresholds the Law sets for particular decisions. Whether a resolution reached the required threshold is one of the first points to check.

The operating budget (işletme projesi) deserves attention. As amended by Law No. 7579 of 7 May 2026, Article 37(1) provides that it is approved at the general meeting of owners. Under Article 37(4), finalised operating budgets, and resolutions of the owners' meeting on operating expenses, count as documents listed in Article 68(1) of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law. An owner who disputes a budget resolution should therefore look at the Article 33 time limits without delay.

5. Who Can Challenge a Resolution, and Within What Time Limit?

An owner challenges a resolution of the owners' meeting by an annulment action (iptal davası) under Article 33(1) of the Condominium Law. The paragraph names two groups of owners and gives each its own time limit, and it removes the time condition for resolutions regarded as non-existent or absolutely null.

• An owner who attended the meeting and voted against the resolution in accordance with Article 32: within one month from the date of the resolution.
• An owner who did not attend the meeting: within one month from learning of the resolution, and in any case within six months from the date of the resolution.
• Resolutions regarded as non-existent or absolutely null (yok veya mutlak butlanla hükümsüz): Article 33(1) provides that no time condition applies (süre koşulu aranmaz).

The reference to Article 32 links the action to the decision book. Article 32(4) requires resolutions to be written in a book whose pages are numbered from one and each sealed by a notary, and signed by all owners present at the meeting; those who voted against sign stating the reason for their dissent. An owner who attends and disagrees should therefore make sure the vote against, and its reason, are written next to the signature at the meeting. Article 33(1) does not list an owner who attended and voted in favour, or who abstained, among those who may sue.

The Law does not describe the one-month and six-month periods as limitation (zamanaşımı) or as periods of forfeiture (hak düşürücü süre); Article 33(1) states that the owner may file the action within them. Nor does the Law list which resolutions are non-existent or absolutely null. Whether a resolution falls into that category is for the court to assess, so an owner who is outside the ordinary time limits should not assume that the exception applies.

6. Which Court Hears the Action, Who Is the Defendant, and Is Mediation Required First?

The court of peace (sulh mahkemesi) where the building is located hears the action; it can be directed against the manager as representative of the owners; and the Mediation Law makes an application to a mediator a condition for filing disputes arising from the Condominium Law. Article 33(1) names the court of peace where the main property is located, and Additional Article 1 of the Condominium Law provides that every kind of dispute arising from the application of this Law is resolved in the courts of peace.

Article 38(2) provides that actions for the annulment of resolutions of the owners' meeting may be brought by directing the action against the manager, representing the owners (in housing estates, the manager elected by the relevant representatives' board). The manager notifies all owners of the action, and if the resolution is annulled, the costs of the proceedings on that matter are met from the common expenses (ortak giderlerden karşılanır).

Before filing, deal with mediation. Article 18/B(1)(c) of the Law on Mediation in Civil Disputes No. 6325, added by Law No. 7445 of 28 March 2023, provides that for disputes arising from the Condominium Law No. 634, having applied to a mediator before filing the action is a condition of the action (dava şartı). Article 1(2) of the same Law applies it to private-law disputes arising from matters over which the parties can freely dispose (tarafların üzerinde serbestçe tasarruf edebilecekleri), and Article 18/B does not list particular types of action; whether a given annulment action falls within the mediation requirement is for the court to assess, so the cautious course is to apply to the mediation office before filing. Under Article 18/A(2), the original or a mediator-certified copy of the final minutes recording that no agreement was reached is attached to the statement of claim; if it is missing, the court gives the claimant a one-week final period to submit it, failing which the action is dismissed on procedural grounds; where it emerges that the action was filed without applying to a mediator, the court dismisses it on procedural grounds without taking any further step.

The application is made to the mediation office in the place of the court with jurisdiction over the dispute (Article 18/A(4)). Article 18/A(15) provides that from the application to the mediation office until the final minutes are drawn up, limitation stops running and periods of forfeiture do not run. Because the Condominium Law does not label the Article 33 periods, the cautious course is to apply to the mediation office well inside the one-month period and to file the action promptly once the final minutes are issued.

7. Can a Resolution Be Put on Hold While the Case Is Pending?

Article 33 does not itself provide for suspending a resolution. An owner can ask the court for an interim measure (ihtiyati tedbir) under the Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (HMK), and the court decides whether the conditions are met. Article 389(1) HMK allows an interim measure on the subject of the dispute where there is concern that a change in the current situation would make obtaining the right substantially more difficult or entirely impossible, or that delay would cause a drawback or serious harm.

Under Article 390(1) HMK, the request is made before the action to the court with subject-matter and territorial jurisdiction over the merits, and after the action is filed, to the court hearing the main action. The applicant states the ground and type of the measure clearly and proves the merits of its case to an approximate degree (yaklaşık olarak ispat; Article 390(3)). Article 392(1) requires the applicant to give security against the losses the other side and third parties may suffer if the applicant proves to be wrong, subject to the exceptions the paragraph lists.

If the measure is granted before the action is filed, Article 397(1) HMK requires the main action to be filed within two weeks from the date on which enforcement of the measure was requested, failing which the measure lapses automatically. Article 18/A(16) of the Mediation Law provides that this period does not run from the application to the mediation office until the final minutes are drawn up.

Article 33(1) also contains a separate remedy: an owner harmed because another owner, or a person using a unit permanently under a lease or another ground, fails to perform their debts and obligations may ask the court of peace for the judge's intervention (hâkimin müdahalesi), and under Article 33(2) the judge, after hearing those concerned, decides immediately and notifies the need for performance within a short period the judge sets. That remedy targets the conduct of an owner or occupant, while the annulment action targets the resolution itself; our guide to noisy neighbours and Article 18 of the Condominium Law covers an owner's duties towards neighbours in a noise dispute.

8. Step by Step: An Owner Living Abroad

1. Keep every call to a meeting: the letter, the registered-mail record or the signed call sheet, with a note of the date it reached you (KMK Art. 29).
2. If you cannot attend, give a written proxy to a person who will attend, naming the meeting, its date and the agenda items, within the limits of KMK Art. 31(5).
3. If you or your representative attend and disagree, vote against and have the reason for the dissent written next to the signature in the decision book (KMK Art. 32(4)).
4. Ask the manager for a copy of the resolution from the decision book, which the manager must keep with the related documents (KMK Art. 36(1)), and record the date you learned of the resolution.
5. Count the time limit: one month from the date of the resolution if you voted against; one month from learning of it, and no later than six months from its date, if you did not attend (KMK Art. 33(1)).
6. Apply to the mediation office first (Mediation Law Art. 18/B(1)(c)); if no agreement is reached, file at the court of peace where the building is located with the final minutes attached (Mediation Law Art. 18/A(2); KMK Art. 33(1)).

Service charges, the operating budget and the manager's duties are covered in our guide to condominium disputes for foreign owners. Our real estate law practice advises flat owners in English, and you can reach us through the contact page.

Frequently Asked Questions

I live abroad and missed the meeting. How long do I have to challenge a resolution?

Under Article 33(1) of the Condominium Law, an owner who did not attend may file an annulment action within one month of learning of the resolution, and in any case within six months of the date of the resolution. Article 18/B(1)(c) of the Mediation Law makes an application to a mediator a condition for filing disputes arising from the Condominium Law; whether a given annulment action falls within that requirement is for the court to assess, so the cautious course is to apply to the mediation office first.

I voted against a resolution. What should I do at the meeting?

Article 32(4) requires owners who vote against to sign the decision book stating the reason for their dissent. Article 33(1) gives an owner who attended and voted against in accordance with Article 32 one month from the date of the resolution to file the annulment action.

Can someone vote for me at the owners' meeting?

Article 31(5) allows an owner to cast the vote through an authorised representative. No one may be appointed as proxy to cast more than five per cent of the votes, and in condominium properties of forty or fewer one person may act as proxy for no more than two people.

Which court decides a challenge to an owners' meeting resolution?

Article 33(1) names the court of peace (sulh mahkemesi) where the building is located, and Additional Article 1 of the Condominium Law sends every dispute arising from the application of the Law to the courts of peace. Under Article 38(2), the action may be directed against the manager, representing the owners.

Is there a time limit for challenging a resolution that is null?

Article 33(1) provides that no time condition applies where resolutions of the owners' meeting are regarded as non-existent or absolutely null. The Law does not list those resolutions; the court assesses whether a resolution falls into that category.

Can the owners' meeting change the management plan by a simple majority?

Article 28(3) of the Condominium Law requires the votes of four fifths of all owners to amend the management plan, and reserves the owners' right to apply to court under Article 33.