In the event that a tenant terminates the lease agreement unilaterally and vacates the premises before the expiry of the lease term, as a rule, the tenant is obliged to compensate the landlord for all losses incurred until the end of the lease term. However, the landlord must also not cause an increase in the damage (duty to mitigate loss).
The loss of the landlord consists of the rent for the period the property remained vacant, starting from the date of evacuation until the date the property could be re-leased under similar conditions. For an evacuation to be legally accepted, physical vacancy is not sufficient; the keys must also be surrendered to the landlord.
In case the evacuation date is disputed between the parties, the burden of proof lies with the tenant to demonstrate that the premises were physically vacated and the keys were delivered, thereby legally terminating the lease relationship on the date claimed by them. If the tenant cannot prove the claimed date, the evacuation date stated by the landlord shall prevail. Unless the keys are delivered, the premises are deemed to remain under the usage of the tenant.
T.C. COURT OF CASSATION 6th CIVIL CHAMBER
Basis No: 2015/7730 Decision No: 2016/3349 Date: 25.04.2016
SUMMARY: The original lawsuit concerns the cancellation of the objection to execution proceedings initiated by the tenant for the return of the security deposit (depozito); the counter-lawsuit concerns the claim for receivables arising from the lease agreement.
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Pursuant to Articles 324 and 325 of the Turkish Code of Obligations (TCO), if a tenant returns the leased property without complying with the contract term or the termination period, their obligations arising from the lease agreement continue for a reasonable period (makul süre) during which the property could be re-leased under similar conditions.
For the evacuation of the leased property to be accepted (fulfillment of the tenant’s obligation to return), physical vacancy alone is not enough; the keys must be delivered to the lessor. If the delivery date is contested, the burden of proof rests on the tenant.
In this case, the parties had agreed in the 2nd article of the supplementary contract that a 3-month notice was required for termination before the expiry date, and in case of early evacuation, the tenant would be liable. The court must first determine the exact date of key delivery. The tenant is responsible for the rent until the keys are delivered.
From the date of key delivery, the tenant is liable for the rent during the “reasonable period” required to re-lease the property. While the court held the tenant liable for a period of 3 months and 21 days, the parties had already limited this “reasonable period” to three months in their supplementary agreement.
CONCLUSION: The judgment was REVERSED because the court failed to correctly calculate the offset (mahsup) between the pre-paid rent, the security deposit, and the actual rent owed until the proven key delivery date plus the 3-month reasonable period.