According to the 2^nd Article of the Administrative Jurisdiction Procedures Law numbered 2577; “the actions which are filed by individuals whose interests are breached for the annulment of administrative proceedings on the grounds that they are unlawful in terms of either power, form, underlying reason and objective” are defined as actions for annulment. The objective of the action for annulment concerning the proceedings undertaken by the administration is to ensure that the activities of the administration are lawful and to protect the legal order.

The annulment verdict given by a court as a result of an action for annulment is not in the nature of a supervision of the legitimacy of an administrative proceeding. Administrative jurisdiction does not function as a superior authority; it only decides the annulment of a proceeding due to its unlawfulness. The administrative proceeding is canceled as of the initial date when it is performed as a result of the annulment verdict. Annulment verdicts are retrospective and for this reason, they bear legal consequences as if the administrative proceeding was not performed at all.

The administrative proceeding is removed upon the cancellation of the proceeding based on the action for annulment and not only the individual bringing the action for annulment but all other individuals utilize from this result. Annulment verdict carries objective nature.

Illegal proceeding is cancelled as a result of an action for annulment. No verdict may be given for the suitable performance of a legal proceeding in substitution for the cancelled proceeding.

The administration does not necessarily carry out any proceeding for the fulfilment of the annulment verdict. It is sufficient for the enforcement of the verdict if the administration stays passive. However, an annulment verdict does not always automatically bear its actual consequences despite the fact that it automatically bears its legal outcomes.

The Administration may need to perform some proceeding and actions for the enforcement of the annulment verdict. Additionally, the proceeding may not be renewed after the cancellation of the established proceeding by way of changing the type of proceeding or carrying out a new regulatory proceeding. The proceeding resulting in the same consequence may not be performed under any other name.

The same process cannot be performed in a way that eliminates the final verdict effect of the annulment decision.

If the proceeding subjected to an annulment verdict is a negative administrative proceeding for the rejection of a request, the proceeding is automatically deemed to be null and void under the annulment verdict and the administration does not need to take any action. However, an annulment verdict for a negative proceeding does not constitute a positive situation by means of substituting the administrative proceeding. Since the annulment verdict does not substitute the administrative proceeding itself, the administration is obliged to carry out suitable actions and proceedings.

The Annulment verdict revokes the annulled proceeding and related actions as of their performance date. The administration is obliged to comply with annulment verdicts, fulfil their requirements and take suitable actions for the scope and objection of the annulment verdict. Our law office provides services in the fields of legal consultancy, actions for annulment and litigation or the disputes and sufferings experienced with the administration in terms of the zoning law.

Our Law Office carry out the annulment actions of the administrative transactions particularly arising from the Law numbered 6306, its Governing Regulation and other relevant law.

These are the actions brought by individuals whose personal rights are breached due to administrative acts and proceedings.

Actions for damages which fall into the category of a full remedy action in administrative jurisdiction and consist of compensation and recovery actions specific to the administrative law are effective supervision and enforcement tool that aims at eliminating violations of rights resulting from subjective legal statuses of respondents and ensuring that the administration complies with the rules of law.

Action for damages is the most distinct and commonly preferred action among full remedy actions. Actions for damages brought in administrative jurisdiction result from administrative proceedings and administrative acts. Actions for damages resulting from administrative acts are examined according to the principles of a service defect or absolute liability.

If the administration which is obliged to conduct its activities in compliance with the law according to the principle of the state of law performs or establishes an unlawful act, this is called a service defect as a rule.

The indemnification of special and extraordinary damages incurred by individuals during the performance of public service is a natural result of the “Social State of Law” nature of the Republic of Turkey as per Article 125 of the Constitution.

As a rule, the administration is obliged to indemnify the damages which might be associated with its public services under a relation of casualty and the damages arising from an administrative act and/or proceeding are indemnified according to the principles of “service defect” or “absolute liability” within the frame of the rules of the administrative law. Furthermore, the relation of casualty is not an absolute condition for the indemnification liability of the administration. Some damages which could not be prevented by the administration despite the fact that it is obliged to prevent the same related to its field of activity also require indemnification without seeking a relation of casualty according to the principle of “social risk”.

Adequate pay may be claimed for occupied State-owned immovables by authorized commission’s discretion. However such consideration may be unlawful or excessive. The administration may issue a new notification upon re-examination claim and it is possible that actions for annulment of adjusted adequate pay may be initiated against the administration for the said new notification.

Confiscation without expropriating means that the administration with an expropriation power seizes an immovable property of an individual without carrying out a procedure suitable for the Constitution and laws and constructs a structure on it such as a facility, building or road or allocates such immovable property for another public service and attempts to restrict the exercise of the ownership and usage right of the owner on such immovable property.

The practices accepted as confiscation without expropriating may involve either actual disposition of the administration on an immovable property without the existence of a legal basis or the inability of the exercise of the property right under an administrative decision.

Pursuant to the Municipal Law numbered 5393, every person residing, based or related within the boundaries of the municipality are obliged to comply with the decisions and announcement of the municipality based on the laws. Failure to comply with such obligations, some penalties prescribed by law are given by the municipal committee. In case these penalties are unlawful, it is possible to initiate annulment actions.

Regulation power is an authorization of the enforcement and administration bodies to perform general and objective rule-based proceedings without a subjective nature.  In this sense, the regulation power materially corresponds to the definition of the law and the concept of legislation.  Laws and equivalent positive law texts are ruled-based proceedings which contain objective, tangible, general and continuous law rules; create a new situation in the field of objective law in terms of their effects or regulate or otherwise eliminate an existing situation.

Pursuant to article 24 of the Council of State Law, in the event that regulations, rules, notifications and so on regulated and put into effect by the administration are illegal, it is possible to initiate an action for annulment of such regulatory acts.