The Concept of Rights in Rem and Their Difference from Personal Rights

Legal Article · 12 November 2026
Thomas Andreas Di Constantinople, Attorney at Law

A right in rem confers direct control over a particular thing and is generally enforceable against everyone. Ownership, easements and security rights belong to this group. A personal right, by contrast, entitles its holder to require a particular person to perform an obligation. This distinction becomes important when property changes hands or the right holder encounters third parties.

The Relationship Between Contract and Rights in Rem

An agreement to sell immovable property does not, by itself, confer ownership on the buyer. The contractual obligation to transfer and the passing of ownership are separate legal stages. Under Articles 705 and 1021 of the Turkish Civil Code, creation of a right in rem over immovable property depends on registration, subject to statutory exceptions. Payment of the price or delivery of the property therefore does not, by itself, establish entitlement in the land register.

The types and basic content of rights in rem are determined by law. Parties cannot create a new right in rem effective against third parties merely by giving a use agreement a name of their choice. Nor does the possibility of annotating personal rights, such as a lease or promise of sale, convert them into ownership rights. An annotation under Article 1009 TMK enables the right to be asserted against persons who subsequently acquire rights.

The nature of the right claimed must therefore be determined first in a dispute. The contracting party, the person shown in the land register, the basis for registration and the scope of any annotation may provide different answers to the same question. Whether a claim rests on a right in rem or a contractual claim also affects the parties to the action and the facts that must be proved.

This article has been prepared for general legal information.