In this article, we address the extraordinary meeting call procedure, the methods to be followed when the management remains passive, and the consequences of irregularities, in light of the Condominium Law No. 634 and the precedents of the Supreme Court of Appeals.
1. Extraordinary Meeting Call Procedure and Legal Requirements
According to the second paragraph of Article 29 of the Condominium Law No. 634, the board of condominium owners can always convene if a significant reason arises. Supreme Court of Appeals decisions require the existence of three fundamental conditions for this meeting to be held:
Requester: The meeting can be held upon the request of the manager, auditor, or one-third of the condominium owners (Supreme Court of Appeals 18th Civil Chamber-2014/15030-2014/18635 -22.12.2014).
Notice Period: All condominium owners must be notified at least 15 days before the requested meeting date (Supreme Court of Appeals 20th Civil Chamber-2017/6699-2018/1134 -19.02.2018).
Notification Method: The call must be made to all condominium owners by means of a document to be signed by them or a registered letter, provided that the reason for the meeting is also specified (Supreme Court of Appeals 5th Civil Chamber-2021/13206-2021/15130 -15.12.2021).
In the concrete case, the collection of signatures from 14 condominium owners in a building consisting of 35 independent sections (34 apartments and 1 shop) meets the minimum requirement of “one-third” (1/3) (approximately 12 owners) sought by the law (Supreme Court of Appeals 20th Civil Chamber-2017/3141-2017/7273 -04.10.2017).
Related content: To examine in detail which elements are mandatory in the call letter, you can refer to our article titled Mandatory Elements Required in the Extraordinary General Assembly Call Letter.
2. Courses of Action to Take if the Current Management Fails to Issue a Call
Supreme Court decisions offer apartment owners two main options if the manager avoids issuing a meeting call despite the legal conditions being met:
Meeting to be Organized Directly by the Apartment Owners: In its decision dated 11.07.2017, Supreme Court 20th Civil Chamber-2017/1901-2017/6393; it was stated that if the management avoids holding a meeting despite apartment owners collecting signatures exceeding 1/3 and requesting an extraordinary meeting, the owners can organize the meeting themselves instead of applying to the court. In this case, the owners must personally adhere to the 15-day notice period and notification procedures (against signature or registered mail) stipulated by law.
Requesting Judicial Intervention: In its decision dated 04.10.2017, Supreme Court 20th Civil Chamber-2017/3141-2017/7273; it was emphasized that if the management rejects the request for an extraordinary meeting or fails to act upon it, despite the 1/3 condition required by law being met, judicial intervention can be requested pursuant to Article 33 of the Condominium Law. In this context, the court can authorize the relevant management or the owners to convene the extraordinary general assembly of apartment owners.
Related content: You can examine our article titled If the Manager Does Not Call a Meeting, Can Co-owners Call a Meeting?, in which we discuss the conditions and application of this method in detail.
3. Consequences of Procedural Irregularity Failure to call the meeting in accordance with proper procedure leads to the invalidation of the decisions made. As stated in the decision of the 18th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, dated 11.03.2014, numbered 2014/3185-2014/4465, all decisions taken at meetings where legal conditions are not met (especially the 15-day period and notification method are not complied with) must be annulled. Similarly, a period of less than 15 days between the notification of the meeting invitation and the meeting date is also a reason for annulment (Court of Cassation, 20th Civil Chamber – 2017/3019-2018/6957 – 31.10.2018).
Related content: You can also find example assessments regarding this procedure in our article titled Legal and Criminal Consequences of a Former Site Manager Failing to Hand Over the Decision Book, which explains how judicial intervention operates under Article 33 of the Condominium Law.
In Conclusion: If the current management fails to issue a call, the co-owners who constitute a 1/3 majority can personally organize the meeting by complying with legal procedures (written/registered notification 15 days in advance and agenda announcement) or they can request the intervention of a judge from the Civil Court of Peace to obtain authorization to hold the meeting.
Related content: Regarding the principle of adherence to the agenda and the invalidity of decisions outside the agenda, you can take a look at our article titled Is It Valid to Change the Manager by Adding an Item to the Agenda During an Extraordinary General Assembly Meeting?
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Who can request an extraordinary meeting of the flat owners’ board?
According to Article 29/2 of the Condominium Law, an extraordinary meeting can be held upon the request of the manager, the auditor, or at least one-third (1/3) of the flat owners. In the presence of an important reason, the board can always convene.
How many owners’ signatures are required in a building with 35 independent sections?
In a building with a total of 35 independent sections, comprising 34 flats and 1 shop, the 1/3 ratio corresponds to approximately 12 owners. Therefore, the signatures of 14 flat owners more than satisfy the minimum request requirement sought by law.
At least how many days in advance should the call for an extraordinary meeting be made?
The invitation must be delivered to all flat owners at least 15 days before the desired date for the meeting. This period is mandatory; even if there is a provision in the management plan that shortens this period, the statutory period is taken as the basis.
By what method should the invitation be made?
The invitation must be made with a document given to all flat owners against signature or via registered mail, clearly stating the reason for the meeting (agenda). Methods such as posting on a notice board, SMS, or WhatsApp are not considered valid for an extraordinary meeting.
If the manager does not issue a call, can the flat owners hold the meeting themselves?
Yes. Property owners who constitute a 1/3 majority can organize the meeting themselves by personally adhering to the legal notice period and notification procedure. Alternatively, under Article 33 of the Condominium Law (KMK), authority for the meeting can be obtained by requesting the intervention of a judge from the Civil Court of Peace.
What happens to decisions made in an improperly convened meeting?
Decisions made in meetings held without adhering to the 15-day period or notification method, or by excluding some owners from the call, must be annulled. The annulment lawsuit, as a rule, is filed in the Civil Court of Peace within the legal period starting from the date the decision is learned.
Why is Expert Legal Support Necessary?
Although the extraordinary meeting process may seem simple, it involves many technical formal requirements, from calculating the signature ratio to the validity of the invitation method, the principle of adherence to the agenda, and notification periods. Any violation of these conditions can lead to the annulment of all decisions made at the meeting. Especially in densely populated areas such as Tuzla, Pendik, Kartal, Maltepe in Istanbul, and Gebze, Darıca, Çayırova in Kocaeli, these calculations and procedures become complex in buildings consisting of numerous independent sections.
A condominium law attorney prepares meeting invitation documents and attendance lists in accordance with legislation, correctly determines the 1/3 and quorum requirements, manages the lawsuit process for a judge’s intervention (KMK Article 33), and ensures timely filing of lawsuits for the annulment of irregularly made decisions. As Tuzla-based 2M Law Office, we provide legal consultancy and lawsuit tracking services for condominium owner board meetings, invitation procedures, and decision annulment cases in the Istanbul Anatolian Side and Kocaeli region.
