THE RELIABILITY OF THE LAND REGISTRY AND THE LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE OF ARTICLE 1023 OF THE TURKISH CIVIL CODE

Regarding the topic of "THE RELIABILITY OF THE LAND REGISTRY AND THE LEGAL MEANING OF ARTICLE 1023 OF THE TURKISH CIVIL CODE";

The cornerstone of Turkish property law and the land registry system is the principle of reliance on the land registry,. Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code (TMK) constitutes the most concrete and powerful legal expression of this principle. According to this article, the acquisition of ownership or other real rights by third parties who, based on good faith, obtain ownership or other real rights from an irregular registration in the land registry is protected by the legal system. The fundamental philosophy of this rule is to prevent the victimization of honest and good-faith third parties who believe in the official registers kept by the state and assume that they have legally acquired rights from the person appearing as the owner, thus establishing trust and stability in the real estate market.

However, this principle, which appears quite clear in theory, creates challenging legal disputes in practice due to human factors, acts of forgery, complexities in inheritance relations, administrative errors, and successive transfers. The conflict between the property right of the true owner and the expectation of legal security of a bona fide third party constitutes the most delicate balance of property law. In this study, disputes that may fall within the scope of Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code, the fundamental problems frequently encountered in practice, judicial approaches to solving these problems, and legal arguments will be examined comprehensively, with academic depth and simplicity accessible to everyone, without the use of any tables.

1. APPLICATION CONDITIONS AND SCOPE OF ARTICLE 1023 OF THE TURKISH CIVIL CODE

In order for a third party who has acquired rights relying on the land registry to be protected, all cumulative conditions required by law under Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code must be fully met. If even one of these conditions is not met, the third party cannot claim good faith, and the true owner will be able to reclaim their title deed.

A. The Existence of a Fraudulent Registration

The fundamental prerequisite for protection is the existence of an invalid registration lacking legal basis. If the registration was legally valid from the beginning and based on a valid legal reason (for example, a valid sales contract), then ownership rights are indisputable without the need for Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code. An invalid registration occurs when ownership is transferred to the wrong person in the land registry as a result of forged documents, a transaction carried out by an incapacitated person, or a transfer made through fraud. Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code comes into play when a new buyer emerges relying on this invalid registration.

B. Acquisition by a Third Party (Acquisition of Real Rights)

To benefit from this protection, the individual must have acquired ownership or limited real rights in the land registry based on a legally valid transaction (sale, donation, etc.) independent of the previous chain of owners. Heirs who inherit the immovable property are not considered third parties (acquirsors in good faith); because heirs are the universal successors of the deceased and acquire the same legal status (rights and obligations) as the deceased. Therefore, heirs cannot benefit from the protection of Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code.

C. The Element of Good Faith (Turkish Civil Code, Article 3)

The most vital element in the application of Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code good faith. According to Article 3 of the law, in order to benefit from the legal consequences that the law attaches to those acting in good faith, it is a condition that this fact was not known at the time of acquisition, and that it was not necessary for it to have been known.

• If a third party knows that the entry in the land registry is fraudulent, that the seller is not the actual owner, that the transaction was carried out with a forged power of attorney, or if they have failed to exercise due care and diligence despite certain suspicious circumstances in the land registry (gross negligence), they cannot be considered to have acted in good faith.

• The existence of good faith is, as a rule, sought at the time of acquisition (at the time of registration in the land registry). The subsequent disappearance of good faith does not invalidate the previous acquisition.

2. FREQUENTLY ENCOUNTERED PROBLEMS IN PRACTICE AND THEIR SOLUTIONS

The main problems in Türkiye's real estate market and land registry practices that challenge the limits of Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code and that most occupy the judicial authorities, along with their legal solutions, can be examined under the following headings:

A. Conflict between Forgery (Abrogating Forgery Transactions) and Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code

One of the most tragic and frequently encountered problems in practice is when fraudsters use fake identity cards, forged power of attorney documents, or deceive land registry officials by making false statements to unjustly transfer real estate to others.

• Problem: While the actual owner resides in their property, a network creates a forged power of attorney in their name and sells the property to a first party (A), who then shortly afterward sells it to a good-faith third party (B), completely unaware of the scheme. When the actual owner files a lawsuit for the cancellation and registration of the title deed, B claims, "I bought it relying on the title deed; Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code protects me."

• Judicial Solution: The Supreme Court's General Assembly of Civil Law and its chamber precedents make a very clear distinction in this matter. If the first transaction (or any transaction in the chain) absolutely null and void , then corruption prevails from the very first step of the registry. The Supreme Court accepts that transactions made through forgery cannot be protected by the principle of reliance on the land registry, because the true will was never formed before the land registry official ("not a defect of will" but "the complete absence of will"). In this case, the property right of the true owner prevails, and the title deed of the bona fide third party B is cancelled. Person B can only file a compensation lawsuit against the person who made the sale to him or against those who committed the forgery, according to general provisions.

B. Declarations, Annotations, and Provisional Measures in the Land Registry

One of the most concrete indicators of whether a third party is acting in good faith is the annotations, declarations, and restrictions recorded in the land registry.

• The problem: A third party acquires a property knowing about, or without checking the land registry, any existing legal annotations, liens, mortgages, or precautionary measures, and subsequently claims, "I acted in good faith."

• Judicial Solution: When a precautionary measure, annotation, or legal action is clearly visible in the land registry, it is legally impossible for a third party to claim ignorance of it. According to the principle of publicity of the land registry, it is presumed that everyone is aware of everything recorded in the registry (presumption of publicity). In this case, the third party cannot benefit from the protection of Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code. As a solution, such annotations in the land registry preemptively eliminate the claim of good faith, and the true owner can easily reclaim their title deed.

C. Family Home Annotation and Violations of Spouses' Rights

The designation of the family home, regulated in Article 193 and subsequent articles of the Turkish Civil Code, is an important restriction introduced to protect the peace and housing rights of spouses.

• The problem: One spouse, registered as the owner of the property, sells the family home to a third party without the explicit consent of the other spouse; the third party argues that they purchased the property in good faith, as there is no annotation in the title deed designating it as a "family home."

• Judicial Resolution: In the practice of the Supreme Court of Appeals, even if there is no annotation in the land registry designating the property as a family home, if the buyer was in a position to know that the property was a family home or failed to fulfill the obligation to investigate whether it was actually used as a family home, the transfer made without the consent of the other spouse is considered invalid. However, although Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code is debated in some exceptional cases where the third party was genuinely in no position to know and acted in good faith relying on the land registry record, transfers without consent are frequently annulled due to the absolute nature of family home protection.

D. Fraudulent Transfer of Inheritance and the Chain of Bona fide Third Parties

When a testator fraudulently transfers real estate to a child or a third party through a sale (or donation) with the intention of defrauding their heirs, this practice becomes the subject of lawsuits concerning fraudulent transactions by the testator.

• The problem: When the person who acquired the property through a fraudulent transaction (the first-degree buyer) subsequently sells this property to a fourth party (third party) who is acting entirely in good faith and is unaware of the situation, what will be the outcome of the heirs' request for cancellation and registration of the title deed?

• Judicial Solution: In cases of fraudulent transfer of property by the deceased, the initial transfer is invalid because it was fraudulent. However, a bona fide third party who subsequently acquires the property is protected by Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code. According to established Supreme Court precedents, the acquisition of ownership by a bona fide third party based on a fraudulent registration in the land registry is protected; the heirs can no longer reclaim the title deed from that person. The heirs' right remains intact only by filing a claim for compensation (reduction or receivables) against the heir or persons who made the fraudulent transfer and disposed of the property.

3. THE DUTY OF CARE REQUIRED IN DETERMINING GOOD FAITH

For a person seeking protection under Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code, simply saying "I didn't know" is not legally sufficient. The legal system imposes a reasonable duty of care on individuals in real estate transactions

Obligation to Examine and Inspect the Land Registry Records On-Site

A person who buys a property;

• By visiting the Land Registry Office in person or examining the land registry records in detail through official systems,

• The buyer is expected to personally inspect the property, checking its actual condition, whether anyone else is residing there, whether there are tenants, and what the boundaries and usage status are. If a property worth millions is purchased for a very low price and under suspicious circumstances, or if the buyer takes over the property without any investigation because they are listed as the owner in the title deed even though someone else is residing there as a tenant, this gross negligence . In cases of gross negligence, the person is not considered to be acting in good faith and is deprived of the protection of Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code.

4. STATE RESPONSIBILITY UNDER ARTICLE 1023 OF THE TURKISH CIVIL CODE (ARTICLE 1007 OF THE TURKISH CIVIL CODE)

To prevent the victimization of well-intentioned individuals who acquired rights relying on the land registry but subsequently lost or were deprived of their ownership due to fraudulent registration, Article 1007 of the Turkish Civil Code provides a very important state guarantee.

Principle of Strict Liability

According to Article 1007 of the Turkish Civil Code, the State (Treasury) is directly responsible for all damages arising from the maintenance of the land registry. This responsibility of the State is strict liability; that is, regardless of whether there is negligence on the part of the land registry official, the damages suffered by individuals due to incorrect maintenance of the registry or fraudulent registration are compensated by the state.

• Application: For example, in a transaction made with a forged power of attorney, when the court returns the title deed to the real owner, the person who purchased the property in good faith and whose title deed is cancelled becomes a victim. This good-faith third party a full judgment/compensation lawsuit Instance, recovering the true market value of the property as of the date of the lawsuit from the Treasury. This mechanism is the greatest legal safeguard ensuring that trust in the land registry is not undermined.

5. DUTIES, POWERS AND PROCEDURAL RULES

Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code and related procedural rules that must be followed in resolving disputes regarding the cancellation, registration, or compensation of title deeds before judicial authorities are as follows:

• Competent Court: In cases involving the cancellation and registration of title deeds, and in compensation cases based on the state's liability (Turkish Civil Code Article 1007), the competent court the Civil Court of First.

• Competent Court: Since the dispute concerns real property ownership and real rights, the lawsuit in the court of the place where the property is located, .

• Burden of Proof: If the third party acquiring the immovable property claims to have acted in good faith, as a rule, the belief in good faith is a legal presumption pursuant to Article 3 of the Turkish Civil Code; however, the actual owner can prove, with any evidence, that the third party did not act in good faith, knew or should have known (caused gross negligence) the situation.

CONCLUSION

Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code, one of the most strategic and sensitive protection mechanisms of Turkish property law, protects acquisitions made in good faith relying on the land registry, while simultaneously attempting to secure the property rights of the true owners. Problems frequently encountered in practice, such as forgery, annotations and precautionary measures in the land registry, fraudulent transactions by the deceased, and family homes, demonstrate that Article 1023 of the Turkish Civil Code does not provide absolute protection; rather, it necessitates a meticulous examination of the good faith condition, the duty of care, and the initial legality in each specific case. The liability of the Treasury under Article 1007 of the Turkish Civil Code, which comes into play when a third party acting in good faith becomes a victim of fraudulent registration, is the most important safeguard completing the balance of justice in the system. A correct understanding of the legal limits of these institutions is vital for ensuring legal security in real estate ownership and preventing loss of rights.