Introduction
This study was prepared by analyzing the decisions of the Supreme Court, Council of State, Court of Conflicts, and first-instance courts presented in relation to the question, “Can condominium ownership be established without a management plan?” The decisions examined reveal that the answer to the question is not singular and definitive, and that the matter shows variations within the framework of legal regulations, factual situations, and judicial interpretations. This study aims to clarify the legal dimensions of the issue by bringing together these different perspectives.
1. Legal Basis of the Management Plan as a Constituent Element
The Condominium Law considers the management plan as one of the essential documents required for the establishment of condominium ownership. Decisions of the Supreme Court and the Council of State frequently confirm this legal requirement. This situation was clearly expressed in the decision numbered 2013/15750 E. of the 18th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court: “A management plan prepared in accordance with the principles in Article 28, based on the manner of use of the independent sections and the characteristics of the buildings if there are multiple structures, and signed by the owner(s) establishing the condominium ownership.”
Similarly, in the Supreme Court General Assembly of Civil Chambers’ decision numbered 2023/572 E., the unifying and mandatory nature of the management plan was emphasized, especially for collective buildings: “A single management plan covering all structures and areas within the scope of a collective building is prepared. The management plan binds all floor owners within the scope of the collective building.”
These decisions demonstrate that the legal regulation mandates the management plan as a “contract” that forms the basis of the condominium regime and binds all owners.
2. Cases Where Legal Obligation Is Overcome and Judicial Interpretations
Despite the strictness of the legal rule, judicial decisions show flexibility in line with fairness and practical necessities.
“Deemed Signed” by Court Decision: Disagreements among owners and some refusing to sign the management plan should not negate the right to establish a condominium. The Supreme Court General Assembly of Civil Chambers’ decision numbered 2017/2000 E. provided a solution to this situation. The decision stated that the documents listed in Article 12 of the Condominium Law (project, occupancy permit, and management plan) must be completed, but that it is possible to transition to condominium ownership “by deeming the management plan signed if shareholders refuse to sign it.” This interpretation aims to prevent malicious obstructions.
Transition from Easement of Construction (Kat İrtifakı) to Condominium Ownership (Kat Mülkiyeti): The decision numbered 2019/363 E. of the General Assembly of Civil Chambers of the Court of Cassation reveals an important exception. The decision, referring to Article 14 of the Condominium Law (KMK), reminds the provision that “an additional management plan is not required for the transition to condominium ownership” if a management plan was provided during the establishment of the easement of construction. This indicates that a plan provided at the beginning of the process is deemed sufficient, and repetitive procedures are avoided.
Condominium Ownership Existing De Facto Without a Management Plan or With Separate Plans: Especially in complexes covering multiple parcels, if the “collective building” management in the legal sense has not been adopted, it is observed that each parcel continues its existence with its own condominium ownership and its own management plan. The decision numbered 2024/8460 E. of the 5th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation exemplifies this situation: “…that there is no management plan covering both parcels between the parties, and also that a collective building management plan under Law No. 634 has not been accepted by the general assembly of unit owners for both parcels and registered in the land registry…”
In such cases, condominium ownership exists, but disputes regarding relations between parcels and common expenses are resolved according to general provisions (Turkish Civil Code, Code of Obligations) instead of the Condominium Law (KMK). As stated in the decision numbered 2018/3771 E. of the 20th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, if collective building management has not been adopted, “general provisions, not the provisions of the Condominium Law, must be applied in the dispute.”
Conclusion
In conclusion, the answer to the question “Can condominium ownership be established without a management plan?” varies according to the legal and de facto situation:
Legally (De Jure): No, according to Article 12 of the Condominium Law No. 634, the management plan is a mandatory constitutive document for the establishment of condominium ownership. It must be submitted for registration in the land registry.
In Judicial Practice and In Fact (De Facto): Yes, under certain conditions, condominium ownership can be established or continue to exist even without a management plan.
If the owners refuse to sign, it is possible for the plan to be “deemed signed” by court order.
A management plan submitted during the easement of floor ownership phase is sufficient for transitioning to condominium ownership.
In structures consisting of multiple parcels, even if there is no unified “collective building management plan” covering all parcels, each parcel can exist as a condominium within itself. In this case, disputes regarding the common management of the parcels will be subject to general provisions instead of the Condominium Law (KMK).
Therefore, while the absence of a management plan does not constitute an absolute impediment to the establishment of condominium ownership, this deficiency leads to a significant legal consequence that fundamentally changes the nature of the legal rules to be applied in the management of the main real estate and in any disputes that may arise. An article suggestion.
Can Condominium Ownership Be Established Without a Management Plan?
The question, “Can condominium ownership be established without a management plan?”, frequently arises in practice, especially concerning site managements, collective structures, and large housing projects. According to Article 12 of the Condominium Law no. 634, a management plan is, as a rule, a mandatory and constitutive document for the establishment of condominium ownership. In the decisions of the Supreme Court and the Council of State, the management plan is considered a “contract” that binds all unit owners and forms the foundation of the condominium ownership regime.
However, in judicial practice, it is observed that exceptions are made to the strict legal regulation. If the owners refuse to sign the management plan, it may be possible to transition to condominium ownership by having the management plan deemed signed by a court decision. Furthermore, if a management plan was submitted while establishing floor easement, it has been accepted by Supreme Court precedents that a new plan is not required during the transition to condominium ownership.
Especially in sites consisting of multiple parcels in areas such as Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe, Gebze, and Çayırova, even if there is no collective building management plan covering all parcels, each parcel can continue to exist as a condominium within itself. In this situation, disputes between parcels are resolved according to the general provisions of the Turkish Civil Code and the Code of Obligations, instead of the Condominium Law.
In conclusion, while the management plan is legally mandatory, in practice, the absence of the plan does not always eliminate the existence of condominium ownership. However, this deficiency creates serious legal risks in matters such as management, representation, and expense sharing. 2M Hukuk Law Office provides effective legal consultancy in condominium ownership and site management disputes, in accordance with Supreme Court precedents.
