The liability of building owners due to damages resulting from earthquakes is handled under Article 69 of the Turkish Code of Obligations No. 6098. This article includes not only buildings, but also all structures made by human hands and fixed to the ground (such as bridges, dams, tunnels, electric poles, statues, huts). In the case of buildings with more than one independent section owner, each independent section owner is considered the building owner.
If the building owner has rented out all or part of the building, he may be held liable to the tenant for damages resulting from the earthquake, in accordance with Article 69 of the Turkish Code of Obligations and also within the framework of the provisions of the lease agreement. The situation of the workers employed by the building owner is evaluated in the context of both Article 69 of the TCO and the service contract, and in this case, the responsibility of the building owner comes to the fore.
People who were harmed by the earthquake despite not having a contractual relationship (for example, guests in the building, customers shopping in the shop, pedestrians whose building pieces fell on them while passing in front of the building, vehicle owners who were damaged as a result of the collapse of the building) can also file a lawsuit against the building owner in accordance with Article 69. .
Building owners, together with usufruct or occupancy rights owners, may be held jointly and severally liable for lack of maintenance. For example, in favor of the person who has a usufruct right over an independent section, the injured person can file a lawsuit against both the owner and the usufruct owner.
If damage occurs as a result of the collapse of the adjacent building while the main building is intact, then the liability of the owners of the adjacent building may be assessed.
The liability of the building owner is considered as strict liability. In other words, the owner may be liable regardless of whether the owner is at fault in causing the damage. However, certain conditions must be present for the building owner to be held responsible in this way. These conditions are framed by the conditions specified in the text of the law and judicial decisions.
ARTICLE 69- (1) The owner of a building or other construction works is obliged to compensate for the damage arising from defects in their construction or deficiencies in their maintenance.
(2) Owners of usufruct and residence rights are jointly and severally liable with the owner for damages arising from deficiencies in the maintenance of the building.
(3) Those responsible reserve the right of recourse to other persons who are responsible to them for these reasons.
Liability of the Building Owner in Earthquakes and Building Defects
Damages resulting from earthquakes often bring up the responsibility of building owners. Article 69 of the Turkish Code of Obligations Law No. 6098 details this responsibility of building owners. If there is a defect or deficiency in the building, the building owner is held responsible for the damage. However, the building owner has the right of recourse due to defects in the construction of the building (contractor, architect, building inspection company, etc.).
The liability of the building owner is not limited to errors in the construction of the building; Maintenance deficiencies are also important. For example, situations such as failure to repair worn-out parts of the building or water in the foundation cause the responsibility of the building owner. In particular, interventions such as column cutting in shops on the ground floors increase the direct liability of the building owner. In such cases, the building owner may recourse to the parties that caused the damage after repairing the damage.
Deterioration or lack of maintenance does not have to be present during the construction process of the structure; These deficiencies may also occur over time. The injured party is subject to the provisions of Article 6 of the Turkish Civil Code and Articles 49-50 of the Turkish Code of Obligations. In accordance with the articles, it is obliged to prove the construction defect or lack of maintenance. However, if the building is completely destroyed, the existence of construction defects or lack of maintenance is considered a presumption and the building owner must prove the contrary.
In the example of an earthquake centered in Kahramanmaraş, it can be assumed that the collapsed buildings were defective in construction or lack of maintenance. On the other hand, buildings that are not destroyed or damaged may be exempt from such deficiencies. Construction defects are not limited to errors during the construction process; situations such as unsuitable ground should also be taken into consideration.
If the building work has not been completed yet, that is, if the construction continues, then the building owner will not be legally responsible and the provisions of tort may be applied for the damages incurred. This indicates that there are special regulations regarding damages during the construction process.
Liability of the Building Owner and Elements of Damage
1. Existence of Damage: In order to determine the liability of the building owner, material or moral damage must have occurred. Damage may be to the property or personal rights of the people damaged. The existence of damage is a fundamental condition for assessing the liability of the building owner.
2. Illegality: In order to determine the liability of the building owner, the damage must result from an unlawful situation. If a damage has occurred, it is accepted that this damage occurred as a result of an unlawful situation. In other words, if the actions of the building owner or other relevant parties cause damage in an unlawful manner, the element of unlawfulness is deemed to have occurred.
3. Appropriate Causality: There must be a logical and clear causal link between the damage and the actions of the building owner. If a direct connection cannot be established between construction defects or lack of maintenance and damage, the liability of the building owner may not be in question. For example, if the building survives an earthquake despite a lack of maintenance in the building, but the building next to it collapses and damages this building in another earthquake, then a proper causal link cannot be established between the lack of maintenance and the damage.
4. Actions of Third Parties: If a situation that causes damage is caused by the grossly faulty actions of a third party, such as the tenant of the building, this breaks the causal link and may eliminate the liability of the building owner. For example, if a tenant secretly cuts a column in a building and this action causes the building to collapse, this may affect the liability of the building owner. However, if the building owner was or should have been aware of this situation, his responsibility continues. Situations such as column cutting, which is a secret action, are rare examples and the building owner is generally not expected to be aware of such a situation.
These examples reveal the important factors that must be taken into account in assessing the liability of the building owner and show that the liability of the building owner will not be automatically accepted in all cases. It is clear that each incident must be evaluated according to its unique circumstances.
Liability of the Building Owner and Legal Situation
1. Liability of the Building Owner: The liability of the building owner is based on Article 69 of the Turkish Code of Obligations (TBK), and this responsibility belongs to the person who was the owner at the time the damage occurred. This applies regardless of when the owner purchased the building. In other words, the owner of the building is held responsible for the damage, even if he purchased the building just before the damage occurred.
2. Liability of More than One Owner: If there is more than one independent section in a building (for example, many flats in an apartment building), the owners of each of these independent sections are jointly and severally liable for the damage. For example, if there are 40 different apartments in a collapsed apartment building and each of them belongs to different people, these 40 owners are held severally responsible for the damage caused.
3. Unfair or Excessive Construction Situation: If the construction is carried out unfairly or excessively, that is, if it is built on someone else's land or exceeds the land boundaries, then the owner of the construction, not the land owner, is held responsible. This indicates that if an illegal situation occurs on the land where the construction takes place, the damage must be borne directly by the builder or owner of the construction.
4. Owners of Public Institutions: If the owner is a public institution, responsibilities are generally evaluated within the framework of administrative law rules. In such cases, the injured parties must file a full jurisdiction lawsuit in the administrative court. However, during the litigation process, Article 55/2 of the TBK. In accordance with the article, the provisions of the Turkish Code of Obligations may be applied. This includes situations where public organizations may also be considered within the scope of private law.
These provisions are the basic legal regulations that determine the legal responsibilities of building owners and include critical points that must be taken into account in case of any structural damage. It is essential to legally evaluate each situation according to its own characteristics.
ARTICLE 55- (2) The provisions of this Law shall also apply to all kinds of administrative actions and transactions and claims and lawsuits regarding damages due to partial or complete loss of body integrity or death of a person caused by other reasons for which the administration is responsible.
Perfect Liability and Right of Recourse of the Building Owner
1. Strict Liability: The liability of the building owner as stipulated by the Turkish Code of Obligations is evaluated within the scope of strict liability. This means that the building owner is liable regardless of whether he or she has the power to discriminate. For example, if the owner of a building dies and the building is left to his heirs, all heirs, including those who are minors or those who do not have the power of discernment, are held jointly and severally liable for the damage. This means that if a newborn baby or a mentally disabled individual is among the heirs, they will be responsible in the same way as other heirs.
2. Effect of Fault: The fault of the building owner does not change the nature of his liability; In other words, even if the building owner is at fault, this does not affect his perfect liability. However, if the injured party is also at fault, the judge may reduce the amount of compensation by taking this into account.
3. Evidence of Emancipation and Relief from Liability: The law does not give the building owner the chance to escape responsibility in cases of strict liability. In other words, even if the building owner has shown all care and attention, he cannot be relieved of liability if there is a construction defect or lack of maintenance in the building. For example, if the building was initially built in accordance with the legislation but the necessary maintenance was not carried out, the building owner will still be responsible.
4. Right of Recourse: After compensating the damage, the building owner may have recourse against the persons who caused the damage. Persons to whom recourse may be made may include professionals such as contractors, architects, engineers, and building inspection companies. Additionally, tenants who fail to notify the owner of maintenance deficiencies in the building or who damage the building through their own actions may also be considered in this context. For example, situations such as a tenant secretly cutting a column give rise to the building owner's right of recourse against the tenant.
5. More than One Legal Reason: The plaintiff may base his case on more than one legal reason. In such cases, the provisions of Article 60 of the Turkish Code of Obligations apply. This article provides the legal framework for how cases filed for more than one legal reason will be processed.
ARTICLE 60 – If the liability of a person can be based on more than one reason, the judge decides according to the reason of liability that provides the best compensation to the injured party, unless the injured party requests otherwise or is not provided for otherwise in the law.
These provisions contain basic information about the strict liability of the building owner and the obligations brought by this responsibility and serve as an important guide for legal practices.