Introduction

This study has been prepared to analyze the procedures and principles for the annulment of condominium owners’ association decisions, in light of the presented Supreme Court decisions. The study, within the framework of Law No. 634 on Condominium Ownership (KMK), examines fundamental issues such as who can file a lawsuit for the annulment of a condominium owners’ board decision, the deadlines for filing a lawsuit, the competent court, the grounds for annulment, and procedural requirements to be observed during the litigation process. The analysis reveals the Supreme Court’s approach to the subject, especially the conditions it seeks in terms of procedure and substance.

1. Conditions for Filing a Lawsuit: Entitled Parties and Deadlines

The right to file a lawsuit for the annulment of condominium owners’ board decisions and the relevant deadlines are clearly regulated in Article 33 of the KMK, as amended by Law No. 5711. Supreme Court decisions meticulously apply this regulation. Accordingly, the right to file a lawsuit is not granted to everyone. As stated in the Supreme Court 18th Civil Chamber’s decision dated 2013/11037 E., "The annulment of condominium owners' board decisions can only be requested by a condominium owner who attended the meeting and voted against the decision." Similarly, in the decision dated 2012/12039 E., it was ruled that the plaintiff who attended the meeting and voted in favor did not have the legal standing to file a lawsuit.

The periods for filing a lawsuit are of a preclusive nature. These periods are clearly stated in the decision numbered 2017/3606 E. of the 20th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation: "Against decisions made by the board of co-owners, every co-owner who attended the board meeting but voted against it in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, may file an annulment lawsuit with the civil court of peace located where the main property is situated, within one month starting from the date of the decision; and every co-owner who did not attend the meeting, within one month starting from the date they learned of the decision; and in any case, within six months starting from the date of the decision."

The most important exception to this rule is when the decision is considered non-existent or absolutely void. In the decision numbered 2011/12081 E. of the 18th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, this situation was "no time limit is sought in cases where decisions of the board of co-owners are deemed non-existent or absolutely void" emphasized. Therefore, courts must first determine the nature of the decision (whether it is annullable or void).

2. Subject of the Annulment Lawsuit: Distinction Between Decisions of the Board of Co-owners and the Board of Directors

A significant distinction noted in Supreme Court decisions is between decisions of the board of condominium owners and decisions of the management board. Only decisions of the board of condominium owners can be directly subject to an annulment lawsuit. According to the decision of the 18th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, dated 2010/331 E., "considering that the lawsuit for the annulment of management board decisions taken by the site's management board, which cannot be subject to an annulment lawsuit, was not examined and finalized by the board of condominium owners"  the lawsuit should be dismissed. This precedent indicates that management board decisions must first be submitted for review to the board of condominium owners, which is a superior body, and only against the final decision made by this board can judicial remedies be pursued.

3. Grounds for Annulment and Procedure in Litigation

Grounds for annulment may arise from the meeting not being held in accordance with procedure (e.g., call, quorum, etc.) or from the content of the decision being unlawful.

Procedural Irregularities: The Supreme Court emphasizes that the meeting invitation must be made in accordance with procedure. For example, failure to comply with the 15-day period and the call procedure specified in Article 29 of the Condominium Law (KMK) for extraordinary meetings is, according to the decision of the 20th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, dated 2018/2570 E., a ground for annulment on its own. Similarly, failure to achieve the meeting quorum (Supreme Court 20th Civil Chamber, 2017/2081 E.) or irregularities in powers of attorney (Supreme Court 18th Civil Chamber, 2009/11792 E.) are also grounds for annulment.

Substantive Irregularities: Decisions being contrary to law or the management plan is the primary ground for annulment. In the decision of the 20th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, numbered 2020/329 E., it was stated that an action taken without achieving the required unanimity in a matter where the management plan requires it is unlawful and must be revoked.

It is critically important that the court does not conduct an incomplete examination during the trial. The Supreme Court has listed the evidence that courts must collect in many of its decisions. In the decision of the 18th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, numbered 2015/5270 E., these documents include; "the minute book... the call documents, lists of attendees and the agenda, powers of attorney, if any, of apartment owners represented by proxy at the meeting of the board of apartment owners... and the title deed records showing all independent sections and their owners in the main property" as documents to be procured. Decisions rendered without collecting this evidence are overturned due to incomplete examination.

4. Effect of the Decision and Scope of the Ruling

A decision by the board of apartment owners is valid and binding on all apartment owners unless annulled by the court (Supreme Court 18th Civil Chamber, 2012/13753 E.). The annulment decision to be rendered by the court, as a rule, produces effects not only for the plaintiff but for all apartment owners. In the decision of the 18th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, numbered 2013/17664 E., it was stated that it is not correct to rule in such a way that the annulment judgment "produces effect only for the plaintiff". Furthermore, the court’s duty is limited to annulling the decision; it was found incorrect to determine "the amount for which the plaintiff will be liable in a way that creates doubt in enforcement" (Supreme Court 20th Civil Chamber, 2017/8317 E.) in addition to the annulment decision.

Conclusion

In light of court decisions, the process of annulling condominium owners’ board decisions is subject to strict procedural and substantive rules. The provisions of the Condominium Law and Supreme Court precedents are decisive on matters such as the right to file a lawsuit, its deadlines, the competent court, and the nature of decisions that can be litigated. In particular, it is emphasized that direct lawsuits cannot be filed against management board decisions, and that annulment lawsuits, other than those for null and void decisions, are subject to forfeiture periods. For a successful annulment lawsuit, in a properly filed case, the contradiction of the meeting or decision with the law and the management plan must be concretely proven by the court in light of the requested evidence.

Why is Expert Lawyer Support Necessary?

The annulment of condominium owners’ board decisions is not a matter that can be resolved solely with basic legal knowledge; it requires significant procedural knowledge, experience, and strategic legal support. Therefore, professional legal support is of great importance both for the complete and error-free conduct of the lawsuit process and for the protection of property rights. Particularly in disputes related to apartment and site managements in and around Istanbul, Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe, Tepeören, mismanaging the process can lead to significant loss of rights. A suggested article.

In this process;

Filing an annulment lawsuit against condominium owners’ board decisions,

The correct calculation of forfeiture periods and making timely applications,

Identifying and proving with evidence the non-compliance of the decisions with the procedure or the management plan,

Formulating an effective legal defense strategy within the framework of **Supreme Court precedents** and the **Condominium Law (CMK)**,

Each of these steps requires a high level of expertise.

A condominium board lawyer plays a critical role in ensuring that the case is conducted in a legally compliant manner, preventing procedural deficiencies from negatively impacting the case, and **preventing the loss of rights due to preclusive periods**.

Experienced lawyers working especially in the **Istanbul, Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe, and Tepeören** regions provide comprehensive legal support in lawsuits filed against condominium board decisions for the **protection of property rights**, the **annulment of unlawful decisions**, and the **elimination of irregularities in common areas, fee obligations, or management decisions**. Thus, not only the plaintiff but also the rights of all flat owners are safeguarded.