3rd Civil Chamber 2017/2358 E. , 2017/2601 K. ‘Case Law Text’
COURT : MAGISTRATE LAW COURT ‘…
…
… As for the plaintiff’s appeal objections to the eviction lawsuit on the grounds of need, according to Article 350/1 of the TCO No. 6098, the eviction lawsuits to be filed based on the claim of need must be filed within one month starting from the date to be determined by complying with the periods stipulated for the termination notice in Article 328 of this Law in indefinite term contracts. Pursuant to Article 353 of the TCO, if the lessor has notified the lessee in writing that he will file a lawsuit before or at the latest within the period stipulated for the filing of the lawsuit, the lawsuit may be filed until the end of an extended lease year following the notification. The period for filing a lawsuit is related to public order and should be taken into consideration by the court automatically, even if the defendant does not assert it.
The lease agreement based on the lawsuit is dated 01/05/2013 and has a term of 1 year. It is understood that the plaintiff notified the defendant that he would not renew the contract and evacuate on 01/05/2014 by stating that he needed the workplace with a notice dated 25/03/2014, and that the notice was notified on 03/04/2014. In this case, a lawsuit can be filed within the one-year period starting on 01/05/2014. The lawsuit was filed on 11/07/2015 within the period renewed on 01/05/2014. For this reason, the court’s reasoning that the eviction lawsuit based on necessity was not filed in due time is not appropriate.
The owner and lessor of the immovable subject to the lawsuit is the plaintiff… Company. The lawsuit was filed due to the company’s need. The plaintiff company demanded the evacuation of the leased property by stating that it will operate the leased bread factory. As the plaintiff is a commercial company, the work to be carried out in the leased premises must be among the company’s fields of activity. It cannot be said that there is a need of the company in a subject that is not included in the articles of association of the company. For this reason, while the Court should determine the plaintiff’s field of activity and evaluate whether the need is sincere and compulsory or not, it is not correct to take the expert report that there is no need to evacuate the leased premises in order for the plaintiff company representative … to continue his life as a basis for the judgement.