With the final decision of the 20th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, a water infiltration problem that neighbors suffered a lot gained a different dimension.

Supreme Court; He ruled that the person who did not repair the downstairs flat as a result of water leakage had to pay compensation to his neighbor and was responsible for making the necessary repairs.

The debate on water infiltration, which opened up between the neighbors, gained a new dimension with the final decision of the 20th Legal Department of the Supreme Court. The citizen, who suffered from the water leaking from the balcony and bathroom of his neighbor upstairs, chose the path of dialogue first.

The victim apartment resident, who expressed to his neighbor that there was damage in his house and that he had to make the necessary renovation, went to the Civil Court of First Instance because his neighbor did not heed the problem. The owner of the apartment number 11, the upstairs neighbor, requested that his apartment was damaged due to leakages from his balcony and bathroom, he applied to the Magistrate's Court for the determination of the damages, so the sum of the damages was 1.168 TL and a thousand TL non-pecuniary compensation. 6. Civil Court of First Instance; With the acceptance of 850 TL of the pecuniary compensation claim, it was decided to be taken from the defendant and given to the plaintiff with the legal interest to be charged as of the date of the case, the claimant's request for surplus, and the rejection of the whole of the moral compensation requested by the plaintiff.

The 18th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals, which evaluated the appeal of the parties, overturned the judgment on the grounds that the court in charge of the trial was the Court of Peace. The 2nd Civil Court of Peace, which continued its trial after the decision of non-jurisdiction of the Civil Court of First Instance, with the acceptance of the case; It is understood that the dampness, spills and blackening in the balcony and bathroom belonging to the plaintiff are caused by the defendant's apartment and the capillary gaps between the balustrades and the balcony ledge to be filled with waterproof liquid insulation materials. ordered that the defendant be given 1 business day for this transaction.

It was decided to give the defendant 2 working days to dismantle the bathtub in the bathroom of the defendant's flat, to renew the ceramic coverings and joints, and then to install the acrylic bathtub. The sentence was appealed by the defendant. The 20th Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals has made a precedent decision.

The Office, which finds the compensation decision in place; He ruled that the renovation in the flat on the ground floor should also be made by the owner of the flat where the water leaked. The Chamber decided to unanimously uphold the court decision.