The Court of Cassation has decided on "replacement with a new one" for a brand new car that has been constantly malfunctioning.

20.05.2025 15:03

The 11th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation approved the decision to replace the luxury car, which developed various defects shortly after purchase, with a new one. The court ruled that the defects of the vehicle were due to hidden defects and that it did not meet the buyer's expectations.

Here is the translated text while preserving the original HTML structure and translating the `title` and `alt` attributes within any `img` tags (though there are no `img` tags in the provided text):



```html

A company in Ankara purchased a brand new luxury vehicle for 1 million 764 thousand 518 lira to be used as an official car in 2019. When the vehicle experienced malfunctions on different dates, the situation was reported to the seller. The authorized service changed some parts of the vehicle and performed paint protection.

FILED A LAWSUIT IN THE COMMERCIAL COURT

Despite multiple applications to the authorized service, the wind noise, door alignment issues, and brake malfunction could not be resolved, and despite paint protection being applied, shadowing and stains appeared on the front glass and chrome parts of the vehicle. The buyer company, claiming that the problems in the vehicle were due to manufacturing defects, filed a lawsuit in the Ankara 8th Commercial Court.

The plaintiff, stating that the vehicle purchased with the intention of being used as an official car did not fulfill this purpose, requested that the vehicle be replaced with a new one that is free of defects, and if this request is not accepted, that it be returned to the seller and the payment be refunded with the highest commercial interest applicable from the date of payment. The defendant company, arguing that the alleged defect was not properly reported within the legal period, stated that there was no manufacturing defect in the vehicle and that all complaints except for the wind noise had been resolved. The defendant requested the dismissal of the case, stating that the legal limit of 30 business days had not been exceeded during the periods when the vehicle was in service and waiting for spare parts.

MALFUNCTIONS QUALIFIED AS "HIDDEN DEFECT"

The Ankara 8th Commercial Court ruled that the vehicle should be replaced with a new one of the same kind. In the court's decision, it was stated that due to the consecutive malfunctions, parts of the vehicle were changed, and these malfunctions, which qualify as "hidden defects," were not caused by use.

The decision noted that the vehicle's cooling compressor and various parts had been changed and repaired, stating: "Due to these repairs and part changes in a newly purchased and high-cost vehicle, considering the frequency of malfunctions and the situations of being taken to service for reasons other than general maintenance and damage from use within approximately 1.5 years from the date of purchase, the expected trust in the vehicle has been lost, and since the vehicle is still in production, the request for replacement with a similar vehicle is deemed appropriate, thus the case has been partially accepted."

Upon appeal against the decision, the Ankara Regional Court of Appeals 22nd Civil Chamber indicated that the malfunctions in the vehicle were of a hidden defect nature and pointed out that the court's decision for "replacement with a similar vehicle" was appropriate. The Supreme Court's 11th Civil Chamber, which reviewed the appeal, also approved the replacement decision as lawful.