"The tenant will rent the rental property for the purpose of hosting camping groups and/or holding events, including private, commercial or public events, with a scope of up to 500 participants per event. The use of the leased property will be for the purposes of camping, hospitality and outdoor accommodation, as well as for any other related purpose that will suit the nature of the aforementioned activity." In clause 3.3, the plaintiff stated as follows: "The landlord declares and undertakes that there is no legal, planning, or regulatory impediment whatsoever to the conduct of any legal activity to be carried out by the tenant in the rented property, in accordance with the rental objectives specified in this agreement."
- The defendant claimed that he relied on the plaintiff's representations, who declared in the agreement that there was no legal or planning impediment to this activity, and that he had invested significant sums in the use of infrastructures for the purpose of the lease that he sought to promote. According to him, rent was paid from February to July 2025, and he stopped paying only after it became clear that it was not possible to obtain a permanent business license without a planning change.
- The defendant began to work with the authorities to regulate the licensing and continues to try to find a temporary outline for regularization, while not sparing criticism that the plaintiff did not disclose to him that he had tried in the past to change the designation of the land without success, thus violating the duty of good faith. The defendant claims that this was a previous fundamental breach on the part of the plaintiff, and that the termination of the payment was made in good faith against the background of a fundamental dispute regarding the liability itself. The defendant adds that an expedited leased eviction proceeding is not suitable for clarifying this complex contractual and planning dispute, and that the eviction relief is disproportionate.
- Alternatively, the defendant is of the opinion that he has the right to delay the payment of the rent until the plaintiff's obligations are settled or the material dispute is resolved, in accordance with clause 11.4 of the agreement. Therefore, he seeks to dismiss or delete the claim, or at the very least, to determine only monetary relief and not irrevocable eviction remedy.
The Ottoman Settlement [Old Version] 1916