A property transfer made under a power of attorney is not protected in every case merely because it rests on a notarised instrument and on the official land registry entry. If the attorney-in-fact has used the authority granted to him against the interests of the principal, and the person dealing with him knows or ought to know this, an action for cancellation and re-registration of title may arise. On the other hand, not every breach of the attorney's duty leads to the cancellation of the title. The purpose of the transaction, the loss, the good faith of the buyer, later transfers and whether the action is brought by the right persons against the right persons are assessed together.
This distinction is particularly important in family sales, in powers of attorney given by owners living abroad, in immovable property inherited by the estate, and in transactions where the sale price never reached the owner. It is incomplete to reduce the dispute to the statement that "the house was sold cheaply" or "the buyer is the attorney's relative". The review below addresses, together with the provisions of the law, eleven Court of Cassation decisions whose full texts have been verified, in terms of the aspects that support the acceptance of the claim and those that may lead to its rejection. [K1–K11]
What does abuse of a power of attorney mean?
The power of representation and the attorney's duties are different
The mandate relationship concerns how the attorney-in-fact is to perform the task; the power of representation concerns whether transactions the attorney concludes with third parties produce effects for the principal. The existence of authority to sell under a power of attorney and the question of whether that authority has been exercised faithfully are therefore two separate questions. Article 504 of the Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK) regulates the scope of authority, Article 505 the duty to act in accordance with instructions, Article 506 the duty of loyalty and care, and Article 508 the duty to account and to hand over what has been received. [M1]
For example, the owner may have asked for an apartment to be sold in order to buy another home. If the attorney uses an apparently valid authority to sell and transfers the apartment to a person close to him for the payment of his own debt, the purpose of the authority and the transaction actually carried out diverge. On the other hand, the implementation of a debt settlement or division agreement genuinely approved by the owner is not automatically treated as abuse merely because a family dispute later arises.
The absence of authority, the excess of authority and the abuse of existing authority are not the same legal problem. Whether the special authority required to transfer or encumber immovable property was absent, whether a forged power of attorney was used, or whether the power of representation had ended must be examined separately. The facts should be described accurately in the petition; different legal grounds should not be squeezed into a single general statement. For the general framework on the type and scope of powers of attorney, the article on types of power of attorney may also be consulted.
Does every lapse of care require cancellation of the title?
An attorney who does not carry out adequate enquiries or does not account after the sale may incur liability. However, for the purposes of cancelling the title, it is also examined whether the power of attorney was used to the detriment of the owner and whether the counterparty to the transaction had knowledge of that. The Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (HGK), when assessing abuse, considers the loss suffered by the principal and the conduct aimed at causing that loss; it does not regard it as mandatory that the attorney must himself obtain a gain. [K3]
For this reason, the first step is to determine what the claim is aimed at: the return of the property, the handing over of the sale price collected, or the making good of some other loss? The same event may support more than one of these claims, but the conditions, the proper defendant and the time limit for each claim are examined separately.
Does a broad authority to sell free the attorney from liability?
The existence in a power of attorney of an authority to sell "at any price, to any person" does not give the attorney freedom to disregard the owner's interests. The duty of loyalty under TBK Art. 506 continues even where the transaction remains within the limits of external authority to represent. The principal naming a particular person as buyer does not, of itself, make the other conditions of the transaction lawful. [M1; K1; K6]
In the decision of the Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (HGK) dated February 18, 2021, E. 2017/1-1243, K. 2021/113, the attorney's transfer of the property first to his spouse, his later acquisition of it himself, and contradictory defences concerning payment and the real reason for the transaction were examined together. The decision did not rest merely on the family relationship; it reached a finding of abuse on the basis of the chain of transactions and the defences taken as a whole. [K1]
The breadth of the authority to sell is therefore not, by itself, a sufficient defence. On the other hand, consistent documents showing that the owner knowingly accepted a specific price, buyer and purpose for the transaction carry weight. Any later approval should also be clarified as to which transaction and conditions it concerned. A general family understanding should not be interpreted as an unlimited approval of all transfers.
Why does the buyer's good faith matter for cancellation of title?
The first buyer who dealt directly with the attorney
If the first buyer did not know that the attorney was abusing his duty, and, having shown the care expected of him, was not in a position to know, the transaction is, as a rule, binding on the principal. In such a case, the attorney's liability in the internal relationship does not automatically extinguish the right of the good-faith buyer. The position of the first buyer is assessed under the principles of honesty and good faith in TMK Art. 2 and 3. [M2; K1; K6]
A community of interest between the buyer and the attorney, the absence of an ordinary economic explanation for the sale, the fact that the price was never actually paid, or the buyer's knowledge that the transaction was contrary to the owner's will may lead to a different result. Bad faith may be shown not only by an express agreement but also by the indications in the concrete case, assessed together. However, the presence of one indication does not mean that the action will necessarily succeed.
A person who acquired the property by a subsequent transfer
Where the property has passed from the first buyer to another person, the acquisition by the subsequent buyer in reliance on the land registry is assessed separately. TMK Art. 1023 protects a third party who, in good faith relying on the registration in the land register, acquires ownership or another real right. TMK Art. 1024 provides that a person who knows, or ought to know, of an unlawful registration cannot benefit from that protection. The basis for a request to correct the register is TMK Art. 1025. [M2]
The bad faith of the first buyer does not automatically render every person in the chain bad faith. The date, parties, price and previous relationships of each acquisition, and any apparent signs of dispute, are investigated. While ownership may be protected in the hands of a good-faith subsequent buyer, a claim for money against the attorney or other persons liable on the relevant conditions remains open. Limited real rights, such as a mortgage, must also be examined in light of their own conditions of acquisition.
A power of attorney given in construction contracts
A power of attorney given by the landowner to the contractor may aim at carrying out the official procedures of the project and the transfers provided for in the contract. As well as the scope of the authority, it must be examined which independent units may be transferred and on what conditions. The peer-reviewed study by Şahan and Kumlu addresses, in this context, the contractor's duty of loyalty, the distinction between abuse and failure to perform properly, and the position of third parties. Since breach of a construction contract and abuse of authority under a power of attorney may give rise to different claims, no conclusion should be drawn merely from reading the power of attorney. [A1]
How are kinship and a low price assessed?
A transfer to a close relative, and a price significantly below the market value, are facts that deepen the enquiry. However, there is no fixed "cancellation percentage" in the legislation for such cases, nor any absolute presumption of bad faith between relatives. The economic explanation for the difference in value is considered together with whether there was a debt, an earlier payment, a division or some other performance.
The Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (HGK) decision of April 16, 2025, E. 2023/7-1037, K. 2025/235 shows the importance of this approach in a dispute over a sale promise and registration based on it. The Assembly assessed the parties' relationship and the evidence on the purpose of the transaction together, and did not regard acquaintance and the difference in value as enough, for the concrete case, to conclude directly that the authority had been abused. The resisting decision was quashed. This result does not mean that every transfer at a low price is valid, nor can the decision be applied directly in the same way to every land registry sale. [K2]
By contrast, in the decision of the 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 1. Hukuk Dairesi) dated February 15, 2022, E. 2021/10174, K. 2022/1170, the expectation of care from an elderly owner, a transfer to a person close to him, the low price and the non-payment of the price were assessed together. Taking account of the fact that the claim had been converted during the proceedings into a claim for the price, the refusal decision was quashed. [K7]
Reading these two decisions together shows that the connection between the pieces of evidence matters more than their number. An expert determines the value of the property at the relevant date; whether the buyer acted in good faith and the legal nature of the transaction are for the court to assess. A separate assessment of the subject is found in the article on unauthorised transfer of company property.
Burden of proof and the evidence to be prepared
Allegation, defence and the duty to account
As a general rule, a person proves the facts from which he derives a favourable outcome. The claimant alleging abuse of a power of attorney must set out the facts on which the allegation rests. In addition, the attorney owes a duty to account arising from TBK Art. 508. Where it is argued that the sum collected was paid to the owner, or that a debt of the owner was discharged by the transfer, the payment and debt relationship on which that defence rests must be separately proved. The duty to account and the burden of proof for all the elements of the allegation of abuse must not be confused. [M1; M3; K2; K9]
The allegation "the sale price was not paid to me" does not by itself always secure cancellation of the title. If the buyer paid the price to the authorised attorney and did not know of the breach in the internal relationship, the dispute may focus on the attorney's duty to hand over the money. On the other hand, if the buyer knew the payment was not made, or acted together with the attorney, the same fact changes its significance for the purposes of cancelling the title.
Table of evidence
| Evidence | Matter it clarifies | Limit of assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Power of attorney, instructions and revocation documents | Scope of authority, purpose of the transaction, termination and notice | Broad authority does not remove the duty of loyalty. |
| Land registry record and official deeds | Chain of transfers, buyers, dates of transactions and annotations | The price stated in an official deed does not by itself show that the money reached the owner. |
| Bank transactions and payment documents | Who paid whom, and with what description | A defence of cash payment is assessed together with other evidence. |
| Valuation report as at the date of sale | Difference between market value and the price stated | A difference in value is not, by itself, evidence of bad faith. |
| Lawful correspondence and witness statements | Instruction, information, approval, care or sharing agreement | How the evidence was obtained and its connection with the concrete facts are important. |
| Debt, settlement and division documents | The economic and legal reason for the transfer that is being defended | The existence of another debt does not of itself show that this transfer was made for that debt. |
The witnesses' accounts must make clear which events they saw directly, what they heard from others and their relationship with the parties. Electronic correspondence should, where possible, be preserved in its full context; the meaning must not be changed by cut-off screenshots. That evidence obtained unlawfully may not be taken into account by the court is set out in HMK Art. 189/2. [M3]
Why can the oath as evidence change the outcome?
In the decision of the 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated May 29, 2025, E. 2024/2796, K. 2025/2797, the defendants argued that the transfer had been made to perform the claimant's debt and at his request. The Chamber found that this defence had not been proved, but considered it significant that the defendants had expressly relied in their petitions on the oath as evidence. A decision of acceptance given without reminding the parties of whether they would propose an oath was treated as a ground for quashing. [K9]
The decision does not contain the conclusion that the transfer to the attorney's spouse is absolutely void. A quashing on account of a procedural deficiency does not mean that the case has ultimately been won or lost. The list of evidence, the burden of proof and the oath strategy should be considered together at the outset of the action.
Who may bring the action? The position of heirs
The owner, heirs and the distinction of return to the estate
The principal, as owner, may ask for the correction of a registration that infringes his right. Where the principal has died, the position of the heirs is examined together with the nature of the joint estate and the object of the claim. Under TMK Art. 640, heirs hold the estate jointly until it is divided. At this stage, protecting a right belonging to the estate is not the same as an individual heir seeking registration only in respect of his own share. [M2]
Bringing an action against a third party who is not an heir, for a right of the estate subject to joint ownership, limited to the claimant's own share, may create a serious procedural problem. Whether all heirs act together; the participation of the other heirs or their consent to an action aimed at returning property to the estate; and whether a representative of the estate should be appointed where necessary are each assessed separately. Differences such as a transfer to shared ownership, or the defendant being an heir, must also be examined separately.
The warning in the 2025 and 2026 decisions
In the decision of the 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated May 6, 2025, E. 2023/3827, K. 2025/2393, a claim directed against a third party solely for the heir's share was separated from a claim for return to the estate. It shows that an action brought solely for an individual share will not automatically become appropriate simply because a representative has been appointed for the estate. [K10]
In the decision dated April 6, 2026, E. 2025/4011, K. 2026/2670 as well, the rejection was upheld in respect of the heirs' claim against a third party limited to their shares. Moreover, because the principal claim for registration was not in a condition to be examined, it was accepted that the alternative claim for the price could not be moved to under HMK Art. 111/2. [K11]
For this reason, the statement "if we cannot have the title, we will claim the price" does not, of itself, correct an incorrectly structured party and claim. The certificate of inheritance, all heirs, the type of ownership at the date of the action and the name in which registration is sought must be determined from the outset. Appointing a representative for the estate and properly amending the claim in the action are also not the same operation.
Against whom is the action brought? Must the attorney necessarily be a defendant?
The principal target of a claim for cancellation and re-registration of title is the owner of the record whose entry is sought to be cancelled. If the attorney is not the registered owner of the property, bringing an action against the attorney alone is not sufficient to recover the property. A claim against the attorney for the price, for an account or for damages separately determines his position in the proceedings.
Where the registered owner has died, the heirs and the proper constitution of the parties must be investigated; bringing an action against a deceased person and a party's death during proceedings are distinct procedural problems. In joint ownership, a co-owner may, as a rule, bring an action for his own share. In joint ownership of the estate, however, the claim to an estate right against a third party and a dispute over an individual share between partners are not assessed in the same way. [M2; M3; K10]
Here, capacity to be a party, authority to pursue the action and standing as a party must be distinguished. For example, the problem of capacity arising from the termination of a company's legal personality is not the same as the existing person not being the proper debtor of the claimed debt. A rejection on the ground of standing is, in general, a rejection on the merits; all these problems should not be grouped under the heading of "dismissal on procedural grounds".
The decision of the 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated April 15, 2025, E. 2023/4135, K. 2025/2007 is among the examples in which the position of an attorney acting jointly must be considered in relation to costs of the proceedings. The decision also points to deficiencies in current land registry records, the correct calculation of shares and transfers during the action. Two generalisations are both mistaken: that the attorney can never be named as a defendant, and that he is always a mandatory defendant. [K5]
Where actions have been brought against the wrong person, the conditions for changing the party under HMK Art. 124 may be examined. However, it cannot be accepted that every defect may be remedied automatically under the label of "joined defendant". Where the property has been transferred during the action, HMK Art. 125 gives the claimant the option of continuing against the new owner or converting the claim into one for compensation against the transferor. The scope and consequences of the choice are determined by the concrete transfer. [M3] For a separate guide, the article on title cancellation and registration for foreigners and persons living abroad may also be useful.
Statute of limitations, preclusive periods and the effect of delay
The general approach to a title cancellation action
The Court of Cassation, as a rule, does not regard an action for cancellation and re-registration of title based on abuse of the attorney's authority as subject to a statute of limitations or a preclusive period. This approach is connected with the protection of the right of ownership. However, the unlimited statement that "there is no time-limit problem at all" is not correct; the legal basis of the claim and special provisions must be assessed separately.
In the decision of the 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated April 8, 2025, E. 2023/3676, K. 2025/1833, the description of a power of attorney obtained by fraud and then abused was criticised for being characterised merely as fraud. The refusal on the ground of a one-year period was quashed, and it was stated that the matter should be examined in respect of abuse of the power of attorney. [K6]
A claim of fraud must be distinguished from a claim of abuse
TBK Art. 39 provides a one-year period in the case of mistake or deception, counted from the discovery of the mistake or deception, and in the case of duress from the time the influence ceases. However, this provision cannot be applied automatically to every immovable property action containing the word "deceived". If the events described constitute abuse of the authority of an attorney, the legal characterisation must be made accordingly. Different legal grounds and dates of knowledge may exist within the same file. [M1; K6; K7]
Disputes based on a pre-cadastral ground
The special provision of Art. 12(3) of the Cadastre Law No. 3402 concerns reliance on legal grounds predating the cadastre, after ten years have passed since the cadastral records became final. This period does not mean that no action can be brought once ten years have passed from every sale made under a power of attorney. Whether the ground predates the cadastre is decisive.
In the decision of the Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (HGK) dated May 25, 2011, E. 2011/2-295, K. 2011/359, the context is a pre-cadastral legal ground and a special preclusive period. The holding of that decision should not be extended to all subsequent land registry transfers. [K4]
There is no single period for money claims
For independent claims arising from the mandate contract, the five-year limitation period in TBK Art. 147(5) applies, and the rule of maturity in Art. 149 is relevant to the starting point. For claims based on a tort, under TBK Art. 72 the period is two years from the date the loss and the person liable become known, and ten years from the act; where the conditions are met, a longer criminal limitation period is also examined. [M1]
However, it is not correct to treat a claim for the price, brought in the place of or alongside a claim for the title on the basis of abuse, as an independent claim for the attorney's failure to hand over the money collected, and automatically subject it to a five-year period. The disputes in K6 and K7, which included a claim for the price, were not dismissed solely on the basis of the period for fraud. Those decisions cannot, however, be converted into a rule that every money claim is unlimited in time. The claim, the facts on which it is based and the relevant case law must be determined together.
Does a long silence amount to approval?
In the decision of the Civil General Assembly of the Court of Cassation (HGK) dated May 28, 2025, E. 2023/1-493, K. 2025/356, an action brought approximately sixteen years after the transactions was examined. The majority of the Assembly did not base its conclusion solely on the time elapsed or on the proposition that delay automatically creates approval. It assessed the question on the basis of witness accounts and other facts concerning whether the transactions conformed to the principal's will. The resisting decision was found to be correct on different reasoning. [K3]
It therefore cannot be inferred that "if sixteen years are allowed to pass, the action will be dismissed". Nevertheless, delay may increase the loss of evidence, the erasure of traces of the price and later acquisitions in good faith. A claim of deliberate approval or abuse of right is also discussed on the basis of the concrete facts, not merely by the calculation of time.
| Claim or step | General approach to time | Starting point and point of attention |
|---|---|---|
| Title cancellation and re-registration based on abuse | As a rule, not subject to a general statute of limitations or preclusive period. | Special provisions, acquisition by a third party and approval are examined separately. |
| Pre-cadastral legal ground | Ten years under Cadastre Law Art. 12(3) | Finality of the cadastral record; it does not run from each sale date. |
| Fraud under TBK Art. 39 | One year | Discovery of the fraud; it is not identical to abuse of authority. |
| Independent power-of-attorney claim | Five years under TBK Art. 147(5) | Maturity and the true nature of the claim are determined. |
| Damages for tort | Two/ten years under TBK Art. 72 | Discovery, date of the act and a longer criminal period are examined. |
| Request for enforcement of an interim measure | One week | Date of notification or service of the interim measure on the requesting party. |
| Principal action after a pre-action interim measure | Two weeks | Date the enforcement of the measure was requested; completing steps are required. |
Competent court, territorial jurisdiction and mediation
Unless a special ground of subject-matter jurisdiction applies, actions aimed at correcting ownership are heard by the civil court of first instance. Under HMK Art. 12, in actions concerning the ownership of immovable property the court of the place where the property is located has exclusive territorial jurisdiction. Where there is more than one immovable property, under the third paragraph of the same provision, an action may be brought in respect of the others at the place where one of them is located. Where the dispute turns into a claim for money or arises from different relationships, subject-matter and territorial jurisdiction must be reassessed. [M3]
There is no general rule that a mandatory mediation requirement applies to every action for title cancellation based on abuse of a power of attorney. Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes, Art. 18/B, regulates specific fields such as leases, partition, division of shared ownership, condominium ownership and neighbour disputes. Whether the relationship is a consumer or commercial dispute, and in particular the nature of the claim for money, may require separate examination of the condition for bringing the action. [M4]
On the other hand, disputes concerning the transfer of immovable property or the creation of a limited real right are suitable for voluntary mediation under Art. 17/B of the same Law. The power to annotate the register provided for in that provision depends on conditions such as a written agreement between the parties and a request by the mediator; a general prohibition on transfer is not treated as obtained by a unilateral application. Special procedure concerning the enforceability of the agreement document must also be observed.
What can be done to prevent the property from being transferred again?
Interim injunction and prima facie proof
Transfer of the property to another person while proceedings are pending may make it more difficult to obtain the right. An interim injunction may be requested under HMK Art. 389 et seq. The application must be made concrete through the block, parcel, independent unit and share information; documents must be submitted showing why urgent protection is needed and, on a prima facie basis, the existence of the underlying right. The court also considers proportionality and security. [M3]
A measure entering a prohibition on transfer and encumbrance in the land registry record is not the same as the protective routes available only for a money claim. Rather than seeking an unlimited prohibition on every property, a measure should be established that relates to the subject of the action and the right to be protected. The effects of the appearance of the existence of an action or dispute in the land registry, and of an injunction prohibiting disposal, are also distinct.
Obtaining an interim measure does not mean that the necessary steps have been completed. Under HMK Art. 393, the decision must be requested for enforcement within one week from its announcement or service on the requesting party. For a measure obtained before the action, the obligation under HMK Art. 397 to bring the principal action within two weeks, and to submit the relevant documents to the file, must also be followed. This second period runs from the date on which enforcement of the measure was requested. [M3]
Does revocation undo a past sale?
Revocation of the attorney may be aimed at stopping the future exercise of authority; it does not, of itself, undo a land registry transfer carried out in the past. The making of the revocation, its notification to the attorney and, where necessary, to the persons concerned, the knowledge that the power of representation has ended, and the position of third parties are each examined separately. TBK Art. 512 to 514 and the provisions on representation must be considered together. [M1]
Monitoring land registry transactions, using notification services and obtaining current records are useful, but they do not provide the same protection as an injunction ordered by the court. Merely drawing up a notice of revocation after learning of the sale, without more, may leave open the risk that the property will pass to subsequent persons.
If the title cannot be recovered, can the price or damages be claimed?
Correct formulation of the claim and of the defendants
Where the acquisition of a good-faith third party is protected, where it is factually impossible to return the property, or where the nature of the event requires a claim for money, a claim for the price or for damages against the persons liable may arise. For this purpose, the ground of liability, the loss, causation and the amount claimed must be explained. The attorney's duty to account, breach of contract and joint acts of other persons may not rest on the same legal foundation.
The alternative action under HMK Art. 111 concerns the claimant putting forward several claims as principal and subsidiary claims against the same defendant. A structure directed at different defendants, such as "title from the owner, price from the attorney", cannot be placed under that provision without any examination; the conditions under which the parties may be sued together and the defendant against whom each claim is made must be separately established. The condition that the principal claim is rejected on the merits must also not be overlooked. [M3; K11]
Double compensation cannot be obtained by recovering both the property and the full amount of the same loss. On the other hand, where further losses have arisen separately after the property has been returned and satisfy the legal conditions, they may require separate assessment. In a claim for interest, the starting point, default, ground of liability and the outcome sought must also be clear.
By reference to which date is the valuation made?
A valuation is not merely the collection of today's advertised prices. The value at the date of the transfer may serve a different function as an indication of abuse, while the value at the date of the action or another relevant date may serve to calculate the compensation claimed. The nature of the property, the characteristics of the independent units, comparable transactions and the shares should be shown separately in the report.
In the decision of the 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation dated April 28, 2025, E. 2025/1990, K. 2025/2256, attention was drawn to the need to determine the values at the relevant date of action for each consolidated case and each independent unit. Proceeding solely from the date of the principal action and from general calculations based on the land share was not regarded as sufficient. The decision should not be read as meaning that every kind of compensation will necessarily be calculated at today's value. [K8]
How is it distinguished from similar legal grounds?
Disguised transaction by the deceased (muris muvazaası): The difference between the apparent transaction and the true will of the deceased, and the purpose of removing property from the heir, are subject to a different assessment. An attorney acting contrary to the deceased's will and the deceased's own disguised transaction carried out with his or her own will are not the same fact.
Lack of capacity: The decisive question is the capacity for judgment at the time of the transaction. Old age, disability or illiteracy do not by themselves mean the absence of capacity for judgment. Health records and, where necessary, specialist examination must be linked to the relevant date. The description of physical disability and restriction in K6 also shows the danger of drawing an automatic conclusion of incapacity.
Forgery and unauthorised representation: An allegation that the power of attorney is forged, or does not contain sufficient authority to transfer the property, is distinct from the use of an existing valid authority in breach of the duty of loyalty. The original document, the records of its execution and the land registry transaction documents are important.
Fiduciary transaction and genuine settlement of debt: An agreement knowingly concluded by the transferor must not be confused with a transaction carried out by the attorney without the transferor's knowledge. Where it is argued that the transaction had the purpose of returning property, division or performance of a debt, the scope and proof of that agreement are assessed separately. [K2; K9]
A criminal investigation does not, by itself, change the land registry record. The claim in the civil action, the parties, the measures and the evidence are followed separately. Recourse to criminal proceedings does not mean that the time limits and procedural obligations of the civil action are generally suspended.
Preparing the file and enforcing the decision
At the first stage, current and historical land registry records, transaction documents, the power of attorney and any notice of revocation are obtained. A single timeline is then prepared, separating the grant of authority, instructions, transfer, payment, discovery, later transfers and the dates of the action. In a dispute concerning inheritance, the capacity as heir and the type of ownership are made visible in the same file.
At the second stage, evidence is identified for each allegation. The statements "the price was not paid", "the owner was in debt", "the sale had been approved" and "the buyer knew nothing" each rely on different facts. Rather than legal conclusions, the expert is asked for the necessary technical findings; the date, share and independent unit calculations in the report are checked.
At the third stage, the claim and temporary protection are prepared. The current record sought to be cancelled, the person in whose name registration is sought or the estate, the target of the claim for money, interest and expenses are shown clearly. Where, during the action, a subdivision, consolidation, condominium ownership or new transfer has occurred, the records are updated. The decision of the 1st Civil Chamber in K5 shows the importance of framing a judgment that avoids enforcement problems caused by old parcel details and incorrect share information.
At the final stage, the finality of the decision, legal remedies and implementation in the land registry are followed. Under HMK Art. 367(2), decisions on real rights over immovable property may not be carried out until they are final. This does not remove the need to monitor separately the conditions and duration of any measure continuing during the proceedings. [M3]
For details, see our article on trust transactions and title cancellation. For further detail, see our article on disinheritance.
Conclusion
At the centre of an action for cancellation and re-registration of title based on abuse of a power of attorney is less the existence of the authority than the purpose for which it was used and with whose knowledge. A broad power of attorney does not remove the duty of loyalty; kinship, a low price and non-payment, however, do not produce a definitive result without concrete connections being established. The position of the first buyer and the reliance of the subsequent person on the land register must be assessed separately.
A successful preparation of the file is achieved through correct legal characterisation, a complete chain of transfers, evidence that complies with the burden of proof, a claim suited to the inheritance partnership and timely temporary protection. The fact that a claim for title is, as a rule, not tied to a specific period does not make unimportant the provisions specific to the cadastre, independent money claims and the time limits for measures. The choice between recovering the title and recovering the price must be framed together with the structure of the parties and the evidence.
This text is for general legal information. The assessment of a concrete dispute is carried out on the basis of the transaction documents and the current state of the file.
Frequently Asked Questions
If the power of attorney contains unlimited authority to sell, can no action be brought?
An action can be brought. A broad authority to sell does not remove the attorney's duty of loyalty and care. However, for cancellation, not only the breadth of the authority but also the abuse and the position of the buyer are assessed on concrete evidence.
Is a sale by the attorney to his spouse definitively cancelled?
No. A spousal or close family relationship may be an important indication; it is assessed together with the price, payment, the real purpose of the transaction and the knowledge of the parties. K1 and K9 show the evidential and procedural dimensions of this examination.
I did not receive the sale price; can I necessarily recover the title?
No. If the buyer paid the authorised attorney and did not know of the abuse, the buyer's acquisition may be protected. In that case, the attorney's duty to account and hand over the money, or liability in damages, may come to the fore.
Is there a one-year period for title cancellation?
A claim for cancellation of title based on abuse of a power of attorney is, as a rule, not subject to a one-year period. The period for deception under TBK Art. 39 belongs to a different legal assessment. The event must be correctly characterised.
Does the passage of ten years since the transaction prevent the action?
Not by itself. The special ten-year period in the Cadastre Law relates to pre-cadastral legal grounds. It does not apply as a general ten-year preclusive period running from the sale date of every sale made under a power of attorney.
As an heir, can I bring an action only for my own share?
Where joint ownership of the estate continues and the action is based on an estate right against a third party who is not an heir, a claim limited to the individual share may create a problem. Return to the estate, the participation of all heirs and, where necessary, the options of a representative must be structured according to the concrete file.
If the property is sold again, does the action end?
It does not end automatically. Where the new buyer is in good faith and there has been a transfer during the action, the options under HMK Art. 125 are examined. The protection of the subsequent person does not, in every case, remove a claim for money against the persons liable.
Does a notice of revocation cancel the sale recorded in the land registry?
No. Revocation affects the future exercise of authority; it does not automatically correct a registration that has already been made. The necessary action and measures are carried out separately.
Is mediation mandatory before this action?
The fact that title cancellation is sought solely on the ground of abuse of a power of attorney does not mean that mediation is mandatory in every file. The nature of the relationship and of the claims is examined separately. Voluntary mediation is also available in land disputes.
When an interim injunction is obtained, is further action required?
Yes. The enforcement of the decision must be requested within the one-week period under HMK Art. 393; for a pre-action measure, the principal action and the completing steps must be taken within the two-week period under HMK Art. 397. The starting points of the periods differ.
Does a quashing decision by the Court of Cassation mean that the case has been definitively won?
No. A quashing may rest on incomplete investigation or a procedural error. The quashing on account of the oath as evidence in K9 is an example. The reasoning of the decision and the outcome of the subsequent proceedings must be considered together.
How long does the action take and how much does it cost?
The duration depends on service, the number of parties, expert examination and the stages of legal remedies. Court fees and expenses also depend on the value of the action, the type of claim and the transactions. It would not be accurate to give a definite period or total fee without seeing the concrete file.
Sources and legal bases
Research and legislation check: October 11, 2026. The full texts of the decisions below have been reviewed through the publicly available records of the Ministry of Justice's Case Law and Legislation system. The links may require a browser that runs JavaScript. Access copies of the decision texts are also included in the delivery package. In the text, the HGK case numbers are shown with the relevant chamber prefix; in some official records they appear without that prefix.
Legislation
- M1 — Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098 (TBK): Art. 39, 72, 147, 149, 504–508 and 512–514.
- M2 — Turkish Civil Code No. 4721 (TMK): Art. 2–3, 640, 702 and 1023–1025.
- M3 — Code of Civil Procedure No. 6100 (HMK): Art. 2, 12, 111, 124–125, 189–190, 367 and 389–397.
- M4 — Law No. 6325 on Mediation in Civil Disputes: Art. 17/B and 18/B.
- M5 — Cadastre Law No. 3402, Art. 12(3); see also K4 for the application of the special period.
Court of Cassation decisions
- K1 — HGK, February 18, 2021, E. 2017/1-1243, K. 2021/113: broad authority, duty of loyalty and contradictory defences.
- K2 — HGK, April 16, 2025, E. 2023/7-1037, K. 2025/235: sale promise, relations between the parties and the joint assessment of evidence.
- K3 — HGK, May 28, 2025, E. 2023/1-493, K. 2025/356: long delay, claim of approval and the majority's reasoning.
- K4 — HGK, May 25, 2011, E. 2011/2-295, K. 2011/359: pre-cadastral legal ground and special period.
- K5 — 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 1. Hukuk Dairesi), April 15, 2025, E. 2023/4135, K. 2025/2007: share, current records, transfer during the action and litigation costs.
- K6 — 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 1. Hukuk Dairesi), April 8, 2025, E. 2023/3676, K. 2025/1833: distinction between fraud and abuse, period and incomplete examination.
- K7 — 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 1. Hukuk Dairesi), February 15, 2022, E. 2021/10174, K. 2022/1170: expectation of care, non-payment of the price and claim for the price.
- K8 — 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 1. Hukuk Dairesi), April 28, 2025, E. 2025/1990, K. 2025/2256: independent units and valuation date in consolidated actions.
- K9 — 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 1. Hukuk Dairesi), May 29, 2025, E. 2024/2796, K. 2025/2797: defence that the debt was performed, burden of proof and oath as evidence.
- K10 — 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 1. Hukuk Dairesi), May 6, 2025, E. 2023/3827, K. 2025/2393: estate right, share claim against a third party and representative.
- K11 — 1st Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation (Yargıtay 1. Hukuk Dairesi), April 6, 2026, E. 2025/4011, K. 2026/2670: claim for an heir's share, procedural problem and alternative claim.
Academic source
- A1 — Gökhan Şahan / Ali Kumlu, "Abuse of Authority by the Contractor in Apartment-for-Land Construction Contracts" ("Kat Karşılığı İnşaat Sözleşmelerinde Yüklenicinin Vekâleti Kötüye Kullanması"), Selçuk University Faculty of Law Journal (Selçuk Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi), Vol. 31, No. 1, 2023, pp. 177–191. Particularly the distinctions at pp. 183–185 have been used.
Starting text used for adaptation
- Aydın Tekdoğan, "Cancellation of Title and Registration Actions Based on the Legal Ground of Abuse of a Power of Attorney" ("Vekâletin Kötüye Kullanılması Hukuksal Nedenine Dayalı Tapu İptali ile Tescil Davaları"), text supplied by the user dated September 16, 2026. The legal subjects in the text have been preserved and the text rewritten; the decision citations and outcomes have been re-verified against primary sources. The date in this record is the date of the text supplied.