Will the election of the manager and auditor in mass housing projects be conducted by a simple majority of the number of independent sections represented by those participating in the mass housing representatives’ board, or by a simple majority of the representatives of all independent sections?

Election of Manager and Auditor in Mass Housing Projects is Done According to the Number of Independent Sections Represented by Those Participating in the Meeting

The KMK (Condominium Law) contains special provisions regarding mass housing projects (Articles 66-74). Article 69 of the KMK states that the mass housing co-owners’ board can delegate its powers to the mass housing representatives’ board in the management plan, and representatives in this board will have voting rights proportional to the number of independent sections they manage. Furthermore, Article 71 of the KMK, as a continuation of this special regulation, stipulates that the manager and auditor for all common areas in the mass housing project shall be elected by a simple majority of the number of independent sections represented by those participating in the mass housing representatives’ board.

In this regard, Article 71/2 of the Condominium Law contains a provision that reads: “The manager and auditor for all common structures, areas, and facilities within the scope of a mass housing project shall be appointed by the vote of an absolute majority of the independent sections managed and represented by the managers and representatives participating in the mass housing project’s board of representatives.” This statement clearly indicates that the election will be held by an absolute majority of the independent sections represented by the representatives attending the meeting. This article also reminds us of the provision of KMK Article 69, which states, “In the mass housing project’s board of representatives, these managers and representatives have as many votes as the number of independent sections they manage and represent.” Therefore, it confirms that voting will not be one vote per person, but weighted according to the number of independent sections represented.

Details regarding the election of the manager and auditor can be regulated in the Management Plan. However, management plans may include details, provided they do not contradict the mandatory provisions of the Condominium Law.

It may be thought that the Supreme Court’s frequent reference to Articles 34 and 41 of the Condominium Law, requiring “majority by number and land share,” stems from the general and mandatory nature of these articles. However, when it comes to a special management organization like a mass housing project, the provision of Article 71 introduced by the Condominium Law specifically for this situation must be applied primarily. In this case, the principle of “majority by number and land share” manifests as representatives having voting rights equivalent to the number of independent sections they represent, and decisions being made by an absolute majority of these weighted votes. Regarding the critical point of the issue, namely whether it’s the majority of “those participating or of all representatives,” the wording of KMK Article 71 (“participating in the mass housing project’s board of representatives”) is clear.

Ultimately, in light of judicial decisions, and especially the decision of the Legal Department of the Court of Jurisdictional Disputes dated 2015/48 E., 2015/270 K., which is based on Article 71 of the Condominium Law (KMK), the election of managers and auditors for all common structures, areas, and facilities within the scope of a mass housing complex should be conducted as follows:

• The election is held in the board of representatives of the mass housing complex.
• In this board, managers and representatives have voting rights proportional to the number of independent sections they manage and represent.
• The manager and auditor are elected by a simple majority vote of the number of independent sections managed and represented by the managers and representatives participating in the board of representatives of the mass housing complex.

Therefore, the correct answer to this question is that the election will be held “by a simple majority vote of the number of independent sections managed and represented by the managers and representatives participating in the board of representatives of the mass housing complex.” It is not a simple majority of the number of independent sections represented by all representatives (including those not participating), but rather a simple majority of the number of independent sections represented by those attending the meeting. This interpretation is directly consistent with Article 71 of the Condominium Law (KMK), which is a special regulation for mass housing complexes.

Why is Expert Opinion / A Lawyer Necessary?

The validity of management processes in collective housing structures directly affects vital issues such as the collection of dues, the sharing of common expenses, and the adoption of legally valid decisions. When the election of the manager and auditor is deemed invalid, all administrative actions fall under legal risk. For this reason, managing the process with a condominium lawyer or a legal expert specializing in collective housing law ensures the prevention of possible disputes and risks of cancellation. Such problems are frequently encountered, especially in rapidly developing residential areas like Istanbul, Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe, Gebze, Darıca, and Çayırova. Also a suggested article.