Determining Entitlement in Urban Transformation

---

What is Determining Entitlement in Urban Transformation?

In urban transformation projects, determining entitlement is the process of identifying who has what rights in risky building, risky area, or reserve building area applications carried out under Law No. 6306. This determination directly concerns the owners of the property, their land share ratios, shareholders, heirs, holders of limited real rights, tenants, business operators, the independent units to be given to the rights holders, valuation principles, debt status, and those who can benefit from financial support such as rent assistance and relocation assistance.

Determining ownership rights is one of the most critical stages of the urban transformation process. This is because it determines who will make decisions regarding the transformation process, how the simple majority will be calculated, who will receive an independent unit in the new building, who can claim compensation or rental assistance, whose land share can be sold, and who can file a lawsuit.

The purpose of the Implementing Regulation of Law No. 6306 is to determine the procedures and principles regarding the identification of risky buildings, risky areas, and reserve building areas, as well as the determination of the value of properties subject to transformation, the agreements to be made with those entitled to rights, and the assistance to be provided. Therefore, determining entitlement is not merely an administrative listing process; it is a comprehensive legal process with consequences related to property rights, contract law, zoning law, land registry law, and administrative law.

If ownership rights are not correctly determined in urban transformation projects, it is possible to grant rights to non-owners, exclude true owners, underreport heirs, incorrectly calculate land shares, prevent tenants from benefiting from financial support, disregard limited real rights, conduct share sales illegally, and subsequently face numerous lawsuits. Therefore, determining ownership rights is the cornerstone of any transformation project.

Who is covered by the entitlement?

The concept of "entitlement" in urban transformation is not uniform. The scope changes depending on the specific area of ​​entitlement being determined. In terms of property rights, the entitled party is the person listed as the owner in the land registry. In co-ownership, each co-owner is entitled to a share of the land proportionally. In joint ownership, heirs may have to act together. In buildings with condominium ownership or easement rights, each independent unit owner is assessed based on their land share proportional to their title deed.

However, in urban transformation projects, entitlement is not limited solely to property owners. Tenants, business operators, and holders of limited real rights may also be considered entitled to certain financial assistance or eviction proceedings. For example, even if the owner does not reside in a risky building, a tenant may be living there. In this case, the tenant does not possess property rights; however, they may be considered entitled to eviction and relocation assistance.

Holders of limited real rights are also important. The property may have usufruct rights, habitation rights, surface rights, mortgages, liens, provisional liens, or other encumbrances. While these rights may not directly create a right to acquire a new independent unit, they can affect the sale price, expropriation compensation, sale of land shares, eviction, and title deed transactions.

Therefore, when determining ownership rights in urban transformation projects, the first question should be "who owns the property?"; however, the second question must be "who else has rights to the property?". Otherwise, even if the owner in the land registry is correctly identified, the transformation process will be incomplete.

The Importance of Land Registry Records in Determining Ownership Rights

The primary document for determining ownership rights is the land registry record. The land registry record shows the property's plot number, the names of the owners, their share ratios, independent unit numbers, land shares, floor easement or condominium ownership status, and any encumbrances. In urban transformation projects, decision-making, simple majority calculations, land share sales, the allocation of new independent units, and title transfer procedures are all carried out according to the land registry records.

Therefore, ownership cannot be determined without obtaining an up-to-date land registry record. Old land registry records, apartment management lists, actual usage status, or verbal statements alone are not sufficient. The person listed as the owner in the land registry may be different from the person actually using the property. For example, the property may have been inherited but still be registered in the name of the deceased in the land registry. In this case, the certificate of inheritance, inheritance procedures, and the representation status of the heirs must be evaluated separately.

The land share recorded in the title deed is also important. In urban transformation projects, many decisions are made by simple majority, not by the number of owners, but by the proportion of their shares. Therefore, instead of asking "how many people agreed?", the decisive question is "what is the total land share of those who agreed?". If the land share is calculated incorrectly, the simple majority decision, the selection of the contractor, the sale of shares, and the building permit process become controversial.

The Ministry announced in the Official Gazette dated February 4, 2026, and numbered 33158, that amendments have been made to the Implementing Regulation of Law No. 6306. These changes should be taken into account in current cases, especially regarding decision-making, notifications, share sales, and land registry applications.

Ownership Rights of the Property Owners

In urban transformation projects, the strongest ownership rights belong to the property owners. Since the owner holds real rights over the property, they have the right to participate in decision-making, objections, lawsuits, acquire new independent units, transfer land shares, sign contractor contracts, request compensation or exchange, benefit from financial support if they meet the conditions for rental assistance, and participate in the share sale process during the risky building process.

However, ownership does not always result in the same outcome. If the owner actually resides in the property, a different assessment may be made regarding certain benefits. If the owner has rented out the property, the tenant may also be included in the process for support such as relocation assistance. If the owner is a company, the power of representation, signature circular, trade registry record, and authorized body decision should be examined. If the owner is a foreigner, special attention is required regarding notifications, power of attorney, and title deed transactions.

In co-ownership, each owner has rights in proportion to their share. In this case, the decision-making process is based on the share ratio. For example, an apartment building might have three owners; if one owner owns 60% of the land, the other two owners might own a total of 40%. In this case, the simple majority calculation is based on the share ratio, not the number of owners.

In buildings subject to condominium ownership, the land shares of the independent unit owners are taken into consideration. In some older buildings, the land shares may not reflect the true value of the independent units. This situation can lead to fair distribution and valuation disputes in urban transformation projects. If the land share clearly contradicts the true value, this issue should be examined separately before the transformation agreement and independent unit distribution are made.

Right of Heirs

One of the most common problems in urban transformation is when the person listed as the owner in the land registry has passed away. In properties registered in the name of the deceased, ownership rights pass to the heirs; however, if the transfer of ownership has not been completed in the land registry, the processes of decision-making, notification, contract signing, and share sale become difficult in practice.

In this case, a certificate of inheritance must first be obtained. The identities of the heirs, their share ratios, and their representation rights must be determined. If there is disagreement among the heirs, the urban transformation process may be significantly slowed down. If joint ownership is involved, the heirs may have to act together or a representative may need to be appointed.

The fact that one of the heirs lives abroad, their address is unknown, they are under guardianship, a guardian has been appointed, or they have renounced the inheritance affects the determination of entitlement. Therefore, the determination of entitlement to inherited real estate should be made not only with the land registry record but also with the inheritance certificate, population records, transfer documents, power of attorney documents, and, if any, court decisions.

Failure to fully list the heirs may lead to the annulment of conversion decisions or render the contract disputed in subsequent lawsuits. In particular, incorrect assessment of heir shares in the calculation of a simple majority may result in the sale of shares belonging to owners who did not participate in the decision being conducted illegally.

Tenant Ownership Rights

Tenants do not have property rights like owners in urban transformation projects. A tenant cannot assert the right to acquire an independent unit in the new building against the title holder. However, tenants may be considered entitled to benefits such as eviction assistance, relocation assistance, and certain social support programs.

During the demolition and eviction process for a building deemed at risk, the tenant's primary obligation is to vacate the property in accordance with the eviction procedure. Once the building is confirmed to be at risk, the tenant cannot indefinitely prevent the demolition and eviction process by simply stating, "my lease agreement is still valid." However, this does not mean the tenant is completely unprotected. If the tenant can document that they are actually residing or operating a business in the risky building, they may be eligible for support such as relocation assistance.

In determining tenant entitlement, documents such as rental agreements, electricity, water, and gas bills, address records, tax certificates, business licenses, eviction reports, and documents proving that the tenant resided or operated a business in the property prior to the risky building approval date are crucial. A common mistake tenants make in urban transformation projects is trying to collect documents only after eviction. Therefore, rental agreements, bills, and address documents should be kept neatly and securely as soon as the risky building process is learned about.

The tenant's entitlement should be evaluated separately from the landlord's entitlement. The landlord has rights to the new independent unit or its price; the tenant, on the other hand, is considered in terms of relocation assistance or temporary support, if the conditions are met. Failure to make this distinction will create false expectations for both the landlord and the tenant.

Holders of Limited Real Rights and Encumbrances

In determining ownership rights in urban transformation projects, title deed restrictions must be carefully examined. The property may have mortgages, liens, precautionary liens, usufruct rights, family home annotations, lease annotations, precautionary measures, or other restrictions. These rights become particularly important in transformation projects, especially during the stages of price, sale, and title registration.

In the application of Law No. 6306, it is possible for rights such as mortgages, provisional attachments, liens, and usufruct rights on immovable property to continue on the price in some sales and transfer processes. Therefore, when determining ownership rights, simply asking "who is the owner?" is not sufficient; the question "what encumbrances exist on the owner's rights?" must also be answered.

For example, if there is a bank mortgage on the property, the compensation for the sale of the land share or expropriation may not be paid directly to the owner. If there is a lien, the compensation may be linked to the enforcement file. If there is a usufruct right, the interests of the bare-owner and the usufruct holder may be separated. If there is a family home annotation, the spouse's consent or rights may also come into play.

Therefore, if the determination of ownership rights is to be carried out completely in urban transformation projects, an up-to-date, encumbered title deed record must be obtained, and each annotation and restriction must be evaluated separately. Otherwise, unexpected legal obstacles may arise during the registration of the new independent unit, the sale price, or the transfer of shares.

Determining Ownership Rights in Risky Buildings

In the process of classifying a building as risky, ownership rights are generally determined based on existing title deeds, land shares, condominium ownership status, and the risky building assessment report. Once the risky building decision is finalized, the building enters the demolition process, and the owners must decide how the new building will be constructed.

In determining ownership rights in risky buildings, the most important issue is accurately identifying the owners and their land shares in the plot on which the building is located. If condominium ownership has been established, the land shares of the independent unit owners are taken as the basis. If there is a floor easement, the land registry records are considered. Actual usage or apartment numbers in the building are not sufficient.

After a risky building is demolished, the property becomes a land plot. At this stage, decision-making processes based on the owners' shares, contractor contracts, construction in exchange for a share of the property, revenue sharing, sale of shares, or expedited expropriation may come into play. With the 2026 amendments, notification, village headman's announcement, electronic notification, and pre-sale inspection processes have been made more systematic.

Errors in determining ownership rights in risky buildings affect the entire process. For example, if an owner has passed away and the heirs have not been considered, the decision may be based on an incomplete party. If the land share of an independent unit has been calculated incorrectly, the simple majority may be erroneous. If there is a lien or precautionary measure on a share, the transfer of title may be delayed. Therefore, the ownership determination report in risky building files must be prepared meticulously.

Ownership Rights in Risky Areas and Reserve Building Areas

Determining ownership rights in high-risk and reserve building areas is more comprehensive than in individual high-risk building files. This is because these areas may contain numerous parcels, buildings, independent units, tenants, businesses, public properties, infrastructure areas, and social facility decisions. In area-based transformation, ownership rights are assessed considering numerous factors, including the current property value, the value of the housing or business premises to be provided in the new project, debt status, exchange, purchase, expropriation, rental assistance, and relocation assistance.

Law No. 6306 stipulates that entitlement assessments shall be conducted by considering the value of the entitlement holder's existing property and the value of the new dwelling or workplace to be provided in the new building, or, if decided by the Presidency, through methods such as revenue sharing or similar arrangements. If the entitlement holder is required to take out a loan, a contract shall be drawn up for the loan amount, and the title deed shall not be transferred until the loan amount is fully repaid.

This regulation clearly shows that determining ownership rights is not simply a matter of "who owns?". In area-based transformation, the value of the rights holder's current property is compared with the value of the independent unit they will receive in the new project. The difference may result in debt or a refund. If the rights holder receives a more valuable independent unit in the new project, they may incur debt; if they receive a lower-valued right, the difference in price or other rights claims may arise.

The biggest disagreement in high-risk and reserve development areas is the fairness of valuation and distribution. It may not always be fair to allocate the same type of independent unit to individuals who own properties of different sizes, locations, and commercial values ​​within the same area. Therefore, determining entitlement must be done using valuation reports, comparable sales, land shares, existing use, zoning rights, and the post-project value of the independent units.

The Relationship Between Valuation and Ownership Rights

Valuation is one of the most important stages in determining ownership rights. In urban transformation projects, what an owner will receive is often determined by the balance between the value of their existing property and the value of their independent unit in the new project. Therefore, valuation reports form the legal basis for determining ownership rights.

When conducting a valuation, factors such as the property's location, size, zoning status, land share, type of independent unit, floor, facade, view, commercial potential, rental income, existing building quality, comparable sales, and post-project value impact should be considered. Determining ownership solely based on municipal market value or tax value often does not reflect the true value.

If the valuation is done incorrectly, the ownership rights will also be incorrect. For example, it is unfair to consider a commercial unit facing the street on the ground floor as the same as a residential unit facing the rear. Similarly, evaluating the property of a landowner with a large share of the land as the same as the property of a landowner with a small share of the land will create a discrepancy.

If the owner believes the valuation report is too low or inaccurate, they must object within the stipulated time, obtain an independent expert report, present comparable sales, and document the property's value-enhancing features. A detailed and technical valuation report is one of the strongest pieces of evidence in ownership disputes.

Simple Majority and Right of Ownership

In urban transformation, determining ownership rights has a significant impact on the decision-making process. In risky areas, reserve building areas, and risky buildings, certain transactions can be decided by a simple majority of shareholders in proportion to their shares. These transactions may include important decisions such as parcel consolidation, subdivision, partition, relinquishment, creation, registration in the land registry, reconstruction, sale of shares, land-for-construction agreements, or revenue sharing.

Therefore, it is essential to accurately determine who is entitled to the property and which share of the land they own. Missing owners, incorrect shares, invalid power of attorney, or failure to consider heirs invalidate a simple majority decision. If a simple majority is not present, the decision may not be enforceable against the owners who did not participate in the decision.

Property owners who do not agree with the decision must be notified of the offer containing the terms of the decision and agreement. With the 2026 amendments, methods such as electronic notification, notary notification, and announcement by the local headman have gained importance. If the offer is not reviewed or accepted within a certain period after notification, the land share sale process may begin.

Therefore, determining ownership rights is not merely a theoretical study. Incorrect ownership determination directly affects processes such as share sales, building permits, contractor contracts, and land registration.

Status of Tenants and Business Operators in Determining Entitlement

Tenants and business owners are not in the same position as property owners in terms of ownership rights; however, they should be considered in eviction and financial support processes. Those operating businesses in risky buildings or areas may face disruptions to their commercial activities, relocation expenses, and temporary income loss.

To benefit from the support, the tenant or business owner must prove actual use of the property. In this context, the lease agreement, tax certificate, chamber of commerce registration, business license, electricity, water and natural gas bills, social security records, commercial ledgers, and eviction notices are important documents. Simply stating "I am a tenant here" is not sufficient.

It is generally not possible for a tenant to request a new independent unit in an urban transformation project. Since the tenant does not own the property, the allocation of independent units in the new project belongs to the owners. However, the tenant should closely follow the process to avoid losing rights such as eviction and relocation assistance.

Objection to Determination of Entitlement

If the determination of ownership rights is incorrect, the interested parties must object. The subject of the objection must be specific. Simply stating "the list is incorrect" is not enough. Which owner is listed incompletely? Which share ratio is incorrect? Which heir has been disregarded? Which independent unit's value has been determined incorrectly? Which right of the tenant or holder of a limited real right has been ignored? These points must be clearly stated.

The appeal petition must be accompanied by title deed registration, inheritance certificate, power of attorney, encumbrance certificate, lease agreement, invoice, business license, valuation report, comparable sales documents, photographs, comparison of old and new projects, and expert reports, if available.

Objections to the determination of entitlement may take the form of an application to the administration, an objection to the valuation report, an objection to the share sale process, a zoning plan/parceling lawsuit, an objection to the expropriation compensation, or a lawsuit for the annulment of an administrative act, depending on the nature of the process. Therefore, it is important to correctly determine which avenue to pursue against which action.

For example, if the list of owners is incorrect, an application for correction can be made to the administration. If the valuation is incorrect, a technical objection to the valuation report is required. If the sale of shares is irregular, a lawsuit can be filed against the sale transaction. If the expropriation price is low, an objection can be made in the civil court during the price determination process. If the zoning plan affects ownership rights, a lawsuit for the cancellation of the plan can be brought in administrative court.

Legal Remedies for Determining Right to Ownership

In urban transformation projects, the legal avenue for resolving ownership disputes varies depending on the nature of the dispute. Decisions regarding ownership rights, planning decisions, reserve building area or risky area applications, eviction-demolition procedures, and share sale processes, which are administrative acts, can be challenged in administrative courts. However, disputes concerning compensation determination, expropriation compensation, title cancellation and registration, contractual claims, and contractor disputes may be heard in the judicial courts, depending on the specific circumstances.

For example, if the administration has determined the rightful owner incompletely or incorrectly, and this action is administrative in nature, an annulment lawsuit may arise. A dispute regarding the value of the independent unit to be given to the rightful owner and the value of the existing property should be evaluated separately according to whether it is an administrative action or a contract. If the rights of the property owner have been violated in a land-for-construction contract with a contractor, claims based on the contract can be pursued in the judicial courts.

Therefore, the source of the dispute must be clarified before filing a lawsuit. Is the ownership list incorrect? Is the valuation wrong? Was the sale of shares irregular? Is the land registration erroneous? Has the contractor's contract been breached? Choosing the wrong legal course can lead to a waste of time and loss of rights.

The Most Common Mistakes in Determining Entitlement

The most common mistake in urban transformation projects is determining ownership rights solely based on the list of apartment residents. However, the essential document is the land registry record. Actual use and registered ownership may differ.

The second mistake is the incomplete list of heirs. Making a decision without identifying the heirs of the deceased owner can lead to serious disputes later on.

The third mistake is the incorrect calculation of land shares. In calculating a simple majority, the land share, not the number of people, should be the basis.

The fourth mistake is completely ignoring tenants. Tenants may be entitled to eviction and relocation assistance even though they do not own the independent unit.

The fifth mistake is ignoring encumbrances. Records such as mortgages, liens, usufruct rights, and precautionary measures affect the price and title deed processes.

The sixth mistake is failing to object to valuation reports within the prescribed time limit. Since entitlement is often based on valuation, an undervaluation or erroneous valuation can cause significant harm.

The seventh mistake is the failure to properly notify the owners who do not agree with the decision about the offer. Lack of notification can invalidate the share sale and building permit processes.

The eighth mistake is confusing the distinction between administrative and judicial proceedings. It is crucial to correctly determine in which court a claim for entitlement should be brought.

Documents Required for Determining Entitlement

To determine eligibility for a valid entitlement, the following documents must be collected:

Current land registry records, encumbrance certificates, condominium or easement information, land share list, independent unit list, risky building assessment report, risky area or reserve building area decision, inheritance certificate, power of attorney documents, population registry records, signature circulars and trade registry records for company owners, lease agreements, invoice and address records, business license, tax certificate, valuation reports, comparable sales documents, zoning status, parceling documents, contractor contract, technical specifications, independent unit sharing table, notification records, village headman's announcement minutes, and electronic notification records.

Without these documents, the determination of entitlement remains incomplete. Especially during litigation or appeals, the lack of documents weakens the claimant's position.

Conclusion

Determining ownership rights in urban transformation is one of the most important legal stages of the transformation process. This determination reveals who owns the property, what share of the land they possess, which heirs should be included in the process, what support tenants can benefit from, how limited real rights and encumbrances will affect compensation or title deed transactions, and who will receive which independent unit in the new project.

If the determination of ownership rights is not done correctly, the entire transformation process becomes controversial. The simple majority may be miscalculated, the land shares of owners who did not participate in the decision may be sold illegally, heirs may be excluded, valuation errors may lead to debt or price disputes, tenants may be deprived of relocation assistance, and the contractor's contract may become subject to invalidity disputes.

In the system governed by Law No. 6306, ownership determination can be carried out by considering the value of the existing property and the value of the residential or commercial property to be provided to the owner in the new structure, or through methods such as land-for-construction agreements, revenue sharing, and similar procedures. Therefore, the determination of ownership must be based on land registry records, valuation reports, and project sharing principles.

In conclusion, determining entitlement in urban transformation is not merely a list of names prepared by the administration. This determination forms the basis of property rights, the allocation of new independent units, the sale of land shares, rental assistance and relocation support, expropriation compensation, and legal rights. Owners, tenants, heirs, and holders of limited real rights should not passively observe the process; they should carefully check title deeds, land shares, valuation reports, notifications, and entitlement lists. If there is an erroneous determination, objections should be filed within the prescribed time, necessary documents should be submitted, and legal action should be taken before any loss of rights occurs.