In its ruling with Case No. 2024/2663 and Decision No. 2024/7206, the Istanbul 15th Administrative Court found the revocation of the short-term residence permit of a foreign property owner, based on an incomplete address investigation, to be unlawful. The court annulled the decision to revoke the residence permit, stating that the information in the audit report was not corroborated by other investigations and documents, whereas the plaintiff submitted electricity, water, and natural gas bills.

Short answer: The absence of the foreigner at home during the address audit does not solely prove that they do not reside at that address in every case. In the examined case file, the names and signatures of the persons whose information was consulted in the report were not present, no further investigation was conducted, and subscription records were not examined. For this reason, the court found the revocation of the residence permit, which was based on an incomplete investigation, to be unlawful.

Case Citation

Court	Istanbul 15th Administrative Court
Case file number	2024/2663
Decision number	2024/7206
Decision date	22.11.2024
Subject of the lawsuit	Annulment action regarding the revocation of the short-term residence permit belonging to a foreigner who owns real estate
Basis of the revocation action	Address audit alleging that the foreigner does not de facto reside at their registered address
Counsel for the plaintiff	Atty. Batın Yılmaz
Defendant administration	Istanbul Governorate
Outcome of the Decision	Annulment of the subject administrative act
Legal remedy	Subject to appeal at the Istanbul Regional Administrative Court within 30 days as of notification

The decision of the Istanbul 15th Administrative Court, E. 2024/2663, K. 2024/7206, which is the subject of this review, was rendered in the annulment action filed and pursued by the plaintiff's counsel Atty. Batın Yılmaz . The decision is discussed solely for the purpose of examining its legal grounds and practical importance, without sharing information that could reveal the identity of the relevant person.

How Did the Dispute Arise?

The plaintiff was granted a short-term residence permit valid between 17.08.2023 and 10.08.2024 due to owning residential real estate in Turkey. The Provincial Directorate of Migration Management claimed that it was determined during the audit conducted at the registered address on 05.11.2023 that the foreigner did not reside at this address, and revoked the residence permit with the transaction dated 15.11.2023.

The plaintiff party claimed that they actually resided in the declared real estate, that not being at home at the time of the audit did not mean the address was abandoned, and that the administration's determination was based on an incomplete investigation. Invoices regarding electricity, water, and natural gas subscriptions were submitted to the case file to support the residency.

The defendant administration's statement of defense was not submitted in due time; subsequently, information and documents were submitted to the file through counsel. The court examined the dispute within the framework of the facts existing on the date the revocation transaction was instituted and the evidence submitted to the file.

Are the Revocation of Residence Permit and the Rejection of the Application the Same Administrative Act?

No. The dispute under review does not concern the rejection of a new residence permit application or an extension request, but rather the termination of a valid, ongoing short-term residence permit by an administrative act. Because the cancellation affects the foreigner's ongoing legal status of stay, the grounds for the act and the findings upon which it is based must be clear, concrete, and subject to judicial review.

Proceeding	Legal nature	The situation in this file
Rejection of the initial application	Denial of the new residence permit request	No
Rejection of the extension request	Failure to grant a period for the term following the expiration of the current permit	No
Annulment of residence permit	Termination of a currently valid ongoing permit	Yes

For the general framework of cancellation grounds, notification, and the litigation process annulment of residence permit and annulment action you may review our article.

The Legal Basis for the Short-Term Residence Permit of Property Owners

Short-term residence permits that may be granted to foreigners who own real estate are regulated under Articles 31 through 33 of the Law on Foreigners and International Protection No. 6458. The current text of the Law Legislation Information System can be accessed via. Official statements of the Presidency of Migration Management regarding permit types also Types of Residence Permits is located on the page.

Law No. 6458, Article 31: Foreigners who own real estate

Article 31/1-(b) of the Law allows for short-term residence permits to be granted to foreigners who own real property in Turkey. In practice, the real estate must be of a residential nature and used for this purpose. Real estate ownership does not obviate the requirement that the residence purpose declared by the foreigner and their actual living arrangements must be compatible with one another.

For detailed information regarding real estate value, residential nature, single real estate requirement, and application documents real estate residence permit conditions you can check our guide.

Law No. 6458, Article 32: Address notification requirement

A foreign national applying for a short-term residence permit must provide their residential address in Türkiye. It is accepted that address declaration is not merely filling out a form field; the declared location must correspond to the actual residence. However, concluding that an actual residence does not exist must be based on adequate investigation and verifiable findings.

Law No. 6458, Article 33: Cancellation of short-term residence permit

Article 33 of the Law regulates the refusal, cancellation, or non-extension of a short-term residence permit in cases where the required conditions are not met or cease to exist, it is determined that the permit is used for purposes other than those for which it was granted, a valid deportation order or entry ban into Türkiye exists against the foreigner, and in other circumstances specified by the law.

Simply stating the statutory ground is insufficient for a cancellation action. The administration must demonstrate due to which specific incident the relevant condition ceased to exist or through what conduct the permit was used outside its intended purpose.

Implementing Regulation Articles 23 and 28

Article 23 of the Regulation on the Implementation of the Law on Foreigners and International Protection governs the notification of changes in residential address to the governorate, while Article 28 regulates that applications based on real estate require the property to be a residence and used for that purpose. Regarding the Regulation and institutional resources concerning migration legislation National Legislation of the Presidency of Migration Management can be accessed via the page.

What Were the Deficiencies in the Address Verification Report?

The primary legal basis of the administrative act subject to the lawsuit is the address inspection report dated 05.11.2023. The report stated that the foreigner was not present at the specified address and that the apartment was vacant. However, the court determined that this record was not substantiated in a manner that would support the conclusion of a lack of actual residence.

The names and signatures of the individuals whose statements were reportedly consulted during the investigation are absent from the report.
No further field research was conducted to establish that the plaintiff did not reside at that address.
The defendant administration has not submitted any other concrete information or document supporting the claim that no actual residence exists.
Electricity, water, and natural gas utility subscriptions and usage records were not examined during the administrative determination.
The subscription invoices submitted by the plaintiff were not evaluated together with the basis for the cancellation procedure.

Evaluating these deficiencies together, the court concluded that the audit report does not constitute a sufficient factual basis for the cancellation procedure. The decision does not indicate that the report cannot be considered evidence under any circumstances; rather, it demonstrates that the report in the specific case is insufficient due to its content and the absence of supporting investigations.

Are Being Absent from Home and Not Residing at That Address the Same Thing?

No. The absence of a person at home at a specific time of inspection may be explained by work, shopping, traveling, health, or other daily life reasons. This single fact does not prove in every case that the person does not use that residence as their habitual dwelling. However, a different conclusion may be reached when consistent neighborhood statements indicating that the apartment has been vacant for a long time, subscription records showing no consumption, and other concrete determinations are evaluated together.

In the reviewed decision, the court did not establish an absolute principle stating that "no action can be taken if a foreigner is not found at home during an address inspection." The emphasized point is that an action producing decisive results regarding de facto residence must not be based on a single and deficient report, but rather substantiated through neighborhood inquiries and subscription records when necessary.

What Investigations Did the Court Expect to Be Conducted?

The court accepted that whether the plaintiff actually resides at the declared address is decisive for the outcome of the dispute. Therefore, it deemed it necessary to consult persons in the vicinity, such as neighbors, building managers, or superintendents, and to obtain subscription agreements for residence-related infrastructure services from the relevant units when required.

Scope of research	Matter to be examined	The circumstances of the specific case
Inspection report	Date and time of the inspection, manner of access to the premises, and clarity of the findings	It was recorded that no one was at the address and the premises were vacant
Neighborhood investigation	Identity, statement, and signature of the persons consulted	Names and signatures were not included in the report
Subscription records	Whether electricity, water, and natural gas subscriptions and usage support the claim of residency	Not examined in the administrative investigation; the plaintiff submitted the bills to the case file
Other concrete evidence	Records indicating that the foreign national resides at another address or that the residence is not being used	Not submitted by the administration

For detailed information regarding the scope of the address inspection, minutes, subscription documents, and the litigation process residence permit address inspection you may review our guide.

Are Electricity, Water, and Natural Gas Bills Conclusive Evidence?

A subscription agreement or utility bill alone does not conclusively prove in every case that a person actually resided in that residence. The subscription may be in another person's name, the immovable property may be used temporarily, or the consumption data may be open to different explanations. Conversely, the subscription being in the applicant's name, the presence of regular consumption, and its conformity with other address records are significant factual elements supporting the claim of de facto residence.

In this file, the utility bills were evaluated against the deficient inspection minutes. The court's conclusion is based not on considering the bills as conclusive evidence on their own, but on the administration's failure to demonstrate its contrary claim through adequate investigation and the plaintiff's submission of documents supporting their use of the address.

The appearance of settlement place information in official records can be checked via the e-Government service named Inquiry of Settlement Place and Other Address Document However, whether the address registration document and de facto residence are the same may be further investigated depending on the characteristics of the dispute.

The Ruling of the Court

Istanbul 15th Administrative Court, unanimously on 22.11.2024:

Annulment of the administrative act subject to the lawsuit regarding the revocation of the residence permit,
Payment of a total of 988 TL in litigation expenses by the defendant administration to the plaintiff,
Payment of the attorney's fee of 36,000 TL determined for hearings in accordance with the Minimum Attorney Fee Tariff in force at the date of the decision by the defendant administration to the plaintiff,
In case the remaining postal advance is not requested, its ex officio return to the plaintiff after the finalization of the decision,
With the right of appeal (istinaf) available at the Istanbul Regional Administrative Court within 30 days from the service of the decision,

The issuance of a decision does not eliminate the necessity to follow the legal remedy process and the stages of the enforcement of the decision by the administration. The appeal period, the date of service, and the subsequent stages of the case file must be evaluated based on the specific decision.

Does the Annulment Decision Automatically Grant the Foreign National a New Residence Permit?

The court decision revokes the cancellation action found to be unlawful. However, whether the foreigner's permit period expired before the decision date, whether another administrative action has been instituted, and whether current residence conditions continue to be met must be evaluated separately. Therefore, the outcome of the annulment decision should not be expressed directly as "issuance of a new residence card" in every case file.

The administration is required to take action in accordance with the reasoning of the court decision. If the foreigner's address, property status, or purpose of residence has changed subsequently, the current legal situation shall be addressed separately. For the general structure of residence permits, residence permit in Turkey you may consult our main guide.

Significance of the Decision in Terms of Enforcement

Not being at home at the time of the inspection is not solely decisive: The conclusion that de facto residence does not exist must be supported by all circumstances of the case.
The content of the report must be subject to judicial review: Elements such as the identity and statements of the persons consulted must be clearly indicated.
Neighborhood investigation must be completed when necessary: Statements by neighbors, building managers, or doormen must be substantiated.
Utility subscription documents must not be disregarded: Electricity, water, and natural gas records must be examined together with other evidence.
The ground for revocation must be individualized: A clear link must be established between the general provision in the law and the specific circumstances of the foreigner.
The decision does not automatically apply to every address verification: The absence of multiple consistent findings and counter-evidence in other case files may lead to a different outcome.

What Conclusions Should Not Be Drawn from This Decision?

A general conclusion cannot be drawn that address verifications are unlawful.
It cannot be said that if a foreigner is not found at home during an inspection, the residence permit can under no circumstances be revoked.
Submitting a single utility bill does not definitively prove de facto residence in every case.
Owning a property does not eliminate the obligation to actually reside in the declared residence and to notify address changes.
This decision does not indicate that all similar lawsuits will conclude with the same outcome.

Which Documents Can Be Examined in an Annulment Lawsuit Based on Address Verification?

Depending on the specific grounds for refusal or revocation; residence cards, title deed records, address registration certificates, historical settlement documents, inspection reports, service of process documents, electricity, water, and natural gas subscription agreements, consumption bills, apartment management records, and other lawful documents that can demonstrate de facto living may be evaluated.

It is important that the documents are not merely existent, but reflect the conditions at the dates of inspection and revocation. The probative value of documents created retroactively or failing to establish a connection with the disputed period may be limited. Furthermore, filing a lawsuit does not automatically stay the execution of the residence permit revocation; the current legal status of stay and the conditions for a stay of execution must be evaluated separately.

Legal Assessment by Plaintiff's Counsel

According to the evaluation of Atty. Batın Yılmaz The distinguishing aspect of the decision is that it does not accept the address verification report as sufficient solely on its own and in terms of form. The Court jointly examined how the finding in the report was formulated, whose knowledge was consulted, whether neighborhood and subscription inquiries were conducted, and the counter-evidence submitted by the plaintiff.

In disputes based on address verification, the assessment should not be reduced merely to the dichotomy of "the foreigner was found or not found at home." The time and method of the inspection, whether the apartment was accessed, the source of neighborhood statements, the use of utilities during the disputed period, the history of the address registration, and the rationale of the administrative action must be addressed together. Since the evidence of each dispute varies, this decision does not constitute a guarantee of any specific outcome.

Frequently Asked Questions

Will my residence permit be revoked if I am not at home during the address verification?

Not being at home during a single inspection is not sufficient for revocation in every case. However, if the administration demonstrates through neighborhood inquiries, multiple inspections, utility records, and other concrete information that the individual does not actually live at that address, it may be evaluated that the conditions for the residence permit have been lost.

Does owning a title deed make address verification unnecessary?

No. In short-term residence permits based on real estate, the property must be a residence and used for that purpose. The title deed registration proves ownership; it does not entirely eliminate the assessment regarding actual residence and accurate address notification.

Do utility bills prove that someone lives at the address?

Electricity, water, and natural gas bills can support actual residency; however, they are not definitive evidence on their own in every case file. The name on the utility account, consumption amounts, the relevant period, and consistency with other address evidence are evaluated together.

What happens if an address change is not reported to the Presidency of Migration Management?

Address changes must be reported within the period and procedure prescribed by legislation. Discrepancies between the reported address and actual residency may entail consequences regarding residence permits and administrative sanctions. In case of an address change, civil registry and migration records must be checked together.

Can a lawsuit be filed against the residence permit revocation decision?

Yes. By examining the grounds for the revocation decision, the notification date, the competent court, and the evidence in the file, filing an annulment lawsuit in the administrative court can be evaluated. The litigation period and the foreigner's current legal status must be determined separately based on the specific notification.

Was the court decision final?

No. The reviewed decision states that an appeal may be filed with the Istanbul Regional Administrative Court within 30 days from the date of service. The statutory appeal period must be evaluated in conjunction with the proper service of the decision.

Conclusion

The decision of the 15th Administrative Court of Istanbul, case no. E. 2024/2663, K. 2024/7206, indicates that the allegation that a foreign property owner does not actually reside at the registered address must be established through verifiable and concrete investigations. In the specific case, considering that the neighborhood investigation was not duly reflected in the official report, that there were no other supporting findings, and that the plaintiff submitted utility subscription bills, the decision to revoke the residence permit was annulled.

The decision does not mean that address verifications are invalid or that every administrative action issued against a foreigner who is not found at home will be annulled. The determining factors are the scope of the determination regarding actual residence, the content of the report, supporting investigations, counter-evidence, and the justification for the administrative action.

Full Anonymized Text of the Decision

Analyzed in this article Of the decision of the 15th Administrative Court of Istanbul, case no. E. 2024/2663, K. 2024/7206, you can access the anonymized sample, with personal data and information that could identify the data subject redacted, in PDF format via the link below.

Review the Residence Permit Revocation Decision as a PDF

The decision is shared solely for informational purposes and for the review of judicial practice. Personal data and information that may directly or indirectly allow identification contained in the decision have been anonymized. In the event that the anonymization and editorial work performed on this page is used or shared on another website, publication, or digital medium batinyilmaz.av.tr must be cited as the source.

Author Information

Attorney Batın YILMAZ
Istanbul Bar Association Bar Registry No: 77008

Compliance Statement with TBB Professional Rules and Advertising Prohibition

This content is for informational purposes only. It does not aim to advertise, secure business, acquire clients, solicit, claim professional superiority, or guarantee results for any person or institution.

While preparing the content the Professional Rules of the Union of Turkish Bar Associations and the provisions regarding the prohibition of advertising for the legal profession have been observed. The information in this article does not constitute legal counsel or a definitive legal opinion with respect to any specific case.

Communication and Legal Information