

A neighbor converts an apartment building’s common area into private space in Turkey. Learn how foreign owners can challenge unauthorized occupation, seek restoration, obtain an injunction and protect condominium rights.
Foreign apartment owners in Turkey may discover that another owner has enclosed part of a corridor, garden, terrace, basement, parking area, entrance or another section of the building and started using it as private property. A neighbor may install a door, construct a wall, expand an apartment, fence part of the garden or prevent other owners from accessing an area that legally belongs to all condominium owners. The fact that the alteration has existed for years does not automatically mean that the neighbor has acquired exclusive ownership. The first legal question is whether the disputed area is actually a common area under the title records, approved architectural project and Turkish condominium rules. If it is, the foreign owner may have remedies to stop the interference, restore the building and protect access to the common property.
Common areas are portions of a condominium that are allocated to the collective use, protection or benefit of the independent units rather than belonging exclusively to one apartment.
Depending on the building and its approved project, common areas can include entrances, corridors, staircases, elevators, roofs, foundations, structural elements, gardens and other shared facilities.
A title deed identifies the independent unit, but a dispute concerning the physical boundaries of an apartment may require examination of additional documents.
The approved architectural project, condominium plan, management plan and land-registry records can become particularly important.
This is often one of the most important pieces of evidence.
If a neighbor claims that an enclosed terrace, corridor or storage area belongs to their apartment, the approved project can help establish whether that area was originally designed as part of the independent unit or as common property.
Photograph and measure the disputed area and compare the existing physical structure with the approved architectural plan.
Unauthorized walls, doors, extensions or enclosures may become readily identifiable through this comparison.
Generally, an apartment owner cannot unilaterally transform collectively owned common property into an exclusive private extension merely because the area is adjacent to their apartment.
The legality of any alteration should be evaluated under the Condominium Ownership Law, the approved project and any valid decisions or consents relevant to the specific modification.
A neighbor may say:
“I have used this area for fifteen years.”
That fact alone does not necessarily establish exclusive ownership.
The legal character of the area must still be determined from the condominium structure and relevant property records.
Ground-floor owners sometimes fence part of a shared garden and prevent other owners from entering.
The fact that the garden is directly outside one apartment does not automatically make it part of that apartment.
The approved project, title records, management plan and any valid allocation of use should be examined.
A terrace may be enclosed with glass, walls or roofing and incorporated into an apartment.
This can raise both condominium and zoning issues.
The owner should determine whether the terrace is common property, whether exclusive-use rights exist and whether the physical alteration is consistent with the approved project.
A particularly clear dispute can arise when an owner moves their entrance door outward and incorporates part of a common corridor into the apartment.
Measurements and the approved architectural project can become powerful evidence in such cases.
Basements and storage spaces frequently create ownership disagreements because physical usage may have developed informally over many years.
The fact that one owner has the only key does not necessarily establish that the space legally belongs exclusively to that person.
Parking disputes can involve ownership, allocated-use rights and condominium decisions.
Before claiming that another owner has unlawfully privatized a parking area, determine whether the disputed location is common property and whether any valid allocation exists.
The management plan can contain important rules concerning use of common property. However, the legal effect of a particular clause should be examined carefully.
An exclusive right to use an area should not automatically be confused with transfer of ownership.
This distinction is important.
An owner may potentially have a legally recognized right to use a particular common area without becoming the sole owner of that area.
The underlying legal status should therefore be identified before litigation.
The neighbor may claim that the modification was approved years ago by the condominium owners.
Request the relevant meeting minutes and decision book rather than accepting this claim verbally.
Alterations affecting common areas can be subject to statutory consent requirements. The required level of consent depends on the nature of the work and applicable legal rules.
A simple informal agreement with the building manager should not automatically be treated as sufficient authorization.
The apartment manager’s administrative authority should not be confused with authority to transfer collectively owned property to one apartment owner.
Any claimed authorization should be examined against the law and condominium records.
A later purchaser may argue that the apartment was physically in that condition when purchased.
That circumstance can be relevant factually, but it does not necessarily legalize an earlier unauthorized alteration.
The approved project and legal status remain important.
A foreign purchaser may have bought an apartment after being shown a garden, terrace or storage area as part of the property.
If that area was actually common property, there may be separate claims against the seller, developer or intermediary depending on the representations and contractual documents.
A developer’s brochure or salesperson’s statement that a terrace “belongs to this apartment” should be checked against official records.
Marketing descriptions cannot necessarily change the legal ownership structure recorded for the condominium.
Where unauthorized occupation is identified, a formal notice can demand termination of the interference and restoration of the common area.
The notice can also help document when the objection was formally raised.
The manager or board should be informed in writing.
Request that the matter be placed on the agenda where appropriate and that relevant building records be preserved.
Take clear photographs showing the alteration and how it prevents or restricts common use.
Where the physical condition may change, preserving dated evidence can become especially important.
Old property advertisements, photographs, construction documents or earlier building records may demonstrate how the area looked before the disputed alteration.
If structural alterations were made, municipal planning and building records may also need examination.
An alteration can potentially create both condominium-law and zoning-law problems.
Potentially, yes. Depending on the facts, judicial remedies may be available to stop unlawful interference with common property and require restoration of the previous condition.
The correct claims and defendants should be determined after examining the title and project documents.
Where another owner unlawfully occupies common property, one of the principal objectives may be termination of the interference.
The precise legal formulation should be determined according to the ownership structure and facts.
If the common area has been physically altered, the claimant may seek removal of unauthorized structures and restoration where the legal requirements are satisfied.
For example, this may involve removal of a wall, fence, enclosure or door.
Where construction is ongoing or the disputed area may be irreversibly altered, interim judicial protection may be considered.
Urgency and the evidentiary position should be evaluated promptly rather than waiting until construction is completed.
If a neighbor is currently building on a common area, evidence should be collected immediately.
Photographs, management notifications, municipal records and, where appropriate, formal evidence-preservation mechanisms can become important.
Many common-area cases require technical comparison between the approved architectural project and the existing building.
A court-appointed expert may examine boundaries, measurements, construction and the relationship between the physical structure and approved plans.
A judicial site inspection can allow the disputed corridor, garden, terrace or basement area to be compared directly with project documentation.
This can be particularly important where parties disagree about measurements.
Past silence can become part of the factual dispute, but it should not automatically be treated as transferring ownership of common property.
The legal consequences of long-standing acquiescence depend on the specific circumstances.
If unlawful occupation caused a measurable financial loss or prevented use of property, possible monetary claims may need to be evaluated separately.
Compensation should not be assumed automatically; ownership, interference, loss and causation must be established.
If a common area has been converted into a shop extension, storage space or another income-generating area, the financial consequences may become more significant.
Records showing commercial use and income should be preserved where relevant.
Even if the owner believes the occupation is clearly unlawful, self-help can create additional civil or criminal disputes.
Use management, administrative and judicial remedies rather than forcibly removing doors, fences or belongings.
A foreign owner does not lose condominium rights because they do not speak Turkish or do not reside permanently in Turkey.
Legal documents, meeting decisions and project records should be translated and reviewed where necessary.
An owner residing outside Turkey can generally arrange legal representation through an appropriately prepared power of attorney.
This can allow document collection, notices and litigation to proceed without the owner being physically present for every step.
The strongest file will commonly include the title deed, condominium records, approved architectural project, management plan, meeting decisions, photographs, correspondence, notices, municipal documents and technical measurements.
The exact evidence depends on the disputed area.
A common-area dispute can affect a future sale.
Prospective purchasers may identify discrepancies between the physical building and official project during due diligence.
Resolving the issue early can therefore have commercial as well as legal value.
Before purchasing an apartment advertised with a private garden, roof terrace, parking area or storage room, confirm whether the area is legally part of the independent unit or merely a common area being used exclusively in practice.
This single check can prevent significant disputes after purchase.
A foreign owner discovering that a neighbor has converted common property into private space should first obtain the title and condominium documents, locate the approved architectural project, compare the project with the current physical condition, photograph the disputed area, investigate any claimed consent or condominium decision, notify the management, preserve municipal records where relevant and evaluate formal notice, interim protection and litigation if voluntary restoration is refused.
Not merely because the corridor is next to their apartment. The approved project, condominium records and legal basis for the alteration must be examined.
The owner cannot automatically treat a shared garden as private property. Any claimed exclusive-use arrangement or authorization should be verified.
Long-term physical use does not by itself necessarily establish exclusive ownership.
The legal authority of the manager and the nature of the alleged permission must be examined. Informal managerial consent does not automatically transfer ownership rights over common property.
Potentially, where the alteration unlawfully interferes with common property and the requirements for restoration are established.
Where ongoing work creates a risk of further harm, available interim judicial and administrative remedies should be evaluated promptly.
In addition to resolving the common-area issue, possible claims against the seller, developer or another responsible party may need examination depending on the representations made during the sale.
It is frequently one of the most important documents because it can establish the original boundaries and legal configuration of the building.
Potentially, yes. Foreign owners can generally act through legal representation using an appropriately prepared power of attorney.
Do not begin by arguing with the neighbor about who has historically used the space. First establish the legal status of the disputed area through the title records, condominium documents and approved architectural project. Once the area is confirmed as common property, the appropriate demand for cessation, restoration or judicial protection can be determined.
Common-area disputes can involve unauthorized garden occupation, enclosed terraces, corridor extensions, parking areas, storage rooms, project violations, condominium decisions, restoration claims and urgent injunction requests. Fırat Fesih Kaya Law Office assists foreign apartment owners and property investors in disputes involving condominium ownership and unauthorized use of common property in Turkey. Lawyer Fırat Fesih Kaya provides legal assistance in reviewing title and architectural records, investigating unauthorized alterations, issuing formal notices, seeking interim protection and pursuing court proceedings for termination of unlawful interference and restoration of common areas.
Phone:
+90 312 434 22 22
Mobile:
+90 532 769 22 22
Email:
info@firatfesihkaya.av.tr
Address:
Mevlana Boulevard No:221, Yıldırım Tower, Office No:148, 06520 Balgat, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey