Official anchors for this topic
Checking a preliminary property sale promise and notarial documentation
A promise to sell real estate is not itself the same event as the final transfer of ownership. TKGM describes the annotation of a sale promise as relating to a notarially prepared agreement under which a future sale is undertaken, while Article 26 of Land Registry Law No. 2644 provides for annotation of relevant notarial sale-promise agreements in the registry at a party’s request. A buyer should therefore distinguish the validity of the promise contract, the effect and status of a registry annotation and the official sale transaction that ultimately transfers title.
Start with the parties, their capacity and the exact property. The agreement should describe the real estate well enough to avoid ambiguity, and the owner or representative should reconcile with the land-registry record. If an agent signed, review the power of attorney, scope and date. Confirm the notary, contract number and date and obtain an original or verifiable copy. An unsigned draft or a deposit receipt does not become a notarial sale promise merely because the commercial file labels it that way.
If the parties intended registry protection through an annotation, verify that the annotation was actually entered. A clause saying that the parties “will apply” is not evidence that the registry action occurred. The Land Registry Law contains time consequences for sale-promise annotations, and TKGM has procedures relating to them, so inspect the current registry status instead of calculating from an unverified contract copy. Review earlier and later restrictions on the property and whether they affect the planned completion.
Reconcile the payment schedule to bank evidence and identify the purpose of every material payment. Before final transfer, recheck owner, restrictions, property identity and authority because a prior promise does not permanently freeze the registry. Where a foreign buyer or a special regulatory purpose is involved, assess the additional rules for that procedure. A completed review should answer four concrete questions: what was promised, whether it was executed in the required form, whether a current registry annotation exists and what official step remains before ownership actually transfers.
What should a buyer test before paying heavily under a preliminary sale promise?
First confirm that the person promising the sale is the owner or holds valid authority to dispose, and that the property is described with identifiers that prevent confusion. Keep three layers separate: the contract itself, any land-registry şerh (annotation) where sought and actually registered, and the final transfer of ownership. The Land Registry Law and TKGM practice allow certain notarised preliminary sale promises to be annotated, but the annotation is not title transfer, and possession of the contract does not prove that an annotation was ever entered.
If an old notarised copy is presented, verify its origin, date, parties and later amendments. Review the payment schedule, default terms, and any encumbrance or mortgage arising after signature. TKGM materials describe a time effect for the annotation of a sale promise, so near closing obtain a current registry record rather than counting five years from an old scan alone. Every payment should trace to the contract, property and purpose, while final ownership transfer remains a separate official act.
A notarial final sale is not the same document as a promise to sell
Turkish Notary Law Article 61/A permits notaries to execute real-estate sale contracts themselves. That newer authority should not blur the file classification: a final real-estate sale contract made under Article 61/A is different from the preliminary promise-to-sell document examined here. When a notarial instrument is produced, read the transaction title, legal effect and registry outcome rather than inferring its nature merely from the word “notary.”