Civil division represents one of the judicial methods of terminating co-ownership, which is applicable when physical or geometric division of co-ownership is not possible or permitted, or when it could not be carried out without significantly reducing the value of the property.
It should be noted that the prohibition of the termination of co-ownership applies only to physical division, but not to civil division, unless it is explicitly
excluded by law.
If the subject of the dissolution is real estate, it will be sold at a public
auction according to the provisions of the Enforcement Act, which we will discuss in more detail later in the text.
Procedure
After the court, through a court-appointed expert, determines that geometric division of the property is not possible, it will decide to carry out a civil division.
The expert will assess the value of the property based on its condition and real estate market conditions, which will be used to determine the starting price.
However, it should be emphasized that the value estimated by the expert often differs from the market value of the property.
Following this, the property is sold at a public auction or by another
appropriate method.
The amount obtained from the sale is then distributed among the
co-owners in proportion to their co-ownership shares.
Dissolution by payout
Dissolution by payout is a special type of civil division that dissolves co-ownership.
The Law on ownership and other real rights stipulates that a co-owner has the right to dissolution in the following cases: if it is specifically prescribed by law or legal affair, or if the co-owner makes it probable that there is a particularly serious reason for dissolution of co-ownership by payout.
In such cases, the court will decide that the property should belong to that co-owner in its entirety, and that they must pay the other co-owners the monetary equivalent of their shares within a timeframe determined by
the circumstances of the case.
One of the serious reasons for the application of dissolution by payout in practice could be that the proposer of such dissolution independently bears the utility costs and regular maintenance costs of the property, and takes care of it alone, which indicates their continuous connection to the property.
Without fulfilling the aforementioned legal presumptions, dissolution by payout will not be possible.
However, there is an exception if the co-owners together hold nine-tenths or more of the co-ownership—then they do not need to prove the existence of a particularly serious reason.