📅 ANKAPARK ALMANAC

The full story of ANKAPARK from 2018 to 2022. Annual breakdown of all events from tender to eviction.

20.09.2018
THEME PARK TENDER
THEME PARK TENDER
AWARDED TO GBM - ÇELİK GROUP JOINT VENTURE IN THE 6TH SESSION
This company that won the operating tender is the same company that undertook construction work in many areas of Ankapark.
06.03.2019
ANKAPARK'S OPENING DATE SPECIFIED IN CONTRACT
ANKAPARK'S OPENING DATE SPECIFIED IN CONTRACT
21.03.2019
OFFICIAL OPENING DATE
OFFICIAL OPENING DATE
07.11.2019
THE PARK FAILED TO OPEN ON SCHEDULE
THE PARK FAILED TO OPEN ON SCHEDULE
A PENALTY OF ₺1,085,000 WAS IMPOSED, BUT IT WAS NEVER PAID
26.11.2019
BY THE OPERATOR FROM THIS DATE ONWARD
FROM THIS DATE ONWARD, THE OPERATOR
SUBMITTED A TOTAL OF 16 PETITIONS TO THE MUNICIPALITY AND KEPT ANKAPARK CLOSED TO VISITORS, CITING TECHNICAL REASONS
30.04.2020
PAYMENT REQUIRED FROM OPERATOR
PAYMENT DUE FROM THE OPERATOR
THE OPERATOR FAILED TO PAY ₺26,400,000 AND DID NOT PROVIDE THE REQUIRED ADDITIONAL PERFORMANCE BOND
28.05.2020
PER CONTRACT, ON 30.04.2020
AS REQUIRED BY THE CONTRACT, ON 30 APRIL 2020
THE OPERATOR WAS GIVEN 90 DAYS TO PAY THE OUTSTANDING AMOUNT AND REMEDY ITS CONTRACTUAL BREACHES
05.06.2020
BY OUR MUNICIPALITY, DAMAGE AND
THE MUNICIPALITY FILED A CASE
TO PRESERVE EVIDENCE AND ASSESS THE DAMAGE
07.10.2020
BEFORE CONTRACT TERMINATION, CONTRACTUAL
THE CONTRACTUAL CURE PERIOD
EXPIRED AFTER 90 DAYS, BEFORE THE CONTRACT WAS TERMINATED
08.10.2020
TERMINATION NOTICE SENT AND
THE TERMINATION NOTICE WAS SERVED
THE OPERATOR WAS GIVEN 30 DAYS TO VACATE THE SITE, AS REQUIRED BY THE CONTRACT, BUT FAILED TO HAND IT OVER WITHIN THAT PERIOD
10.11.2020
FOR EVICTION
THE MUNICIPALITY SOUGHT THE OPERATOR'S EVICTION
BY APPLYING TO THE DISTRICT GOVERNOR'S OFFICE
12.10.2020
LAWSUIT FOR DETERMINATION OF TENANCY STATUS
THE OPERATOR FILED SUIT TO ESTABLISH ITS TENANCY
AND PREVENT INTERFERENCE WITH ITS POSSESSION IN AN EFFORT TO AVOID EVICTION
22.11.2020
IN DAMAGE AND EVIDENCE DETERMINATION CASE FILED BY MUNICIPALITY
IN THE MUNICIPALITY'S DAMAGE-ASSESSMENT CASE
THE COURT ASSESSED THE DAMAGE AT ₺111,210,000
27.11.2020
EVICTION REQUEST BY MUNICIPALITY
THE DISTRICT GOVERNOR'S OFFICE
REJECTED THE MUNICIPALITY'S EVICTION REQUEST
09.12.2020
IN LAWSUIT FILED BY OPERATOR
IN THE OPERATOR'S LAWSUIT
THE COURT HALTED THE EVICTION WITH AN INJUNCTION SECURED BY JUST ₺50,000 IN COLLATERAL
18.12.2020
EVICTION LAWSUIT FILED BY US
THE MUNICIPALITY FILED AN EVICTION SUIT
ON THE GROUNDS OF BREACH OF CONTRACT
22.12.2020
AN APPEAL WAS FILED TO THE REGIONAL COURT
THE MUNICIPALITY APPEALED TO THE REGIONAL COURT
CHALLENGING THE INJUNCTION THAT HALTED EVICTION IN THE TENANCY CASE
25.12.2020
A COMPLAINT WAS FILED WITH HSK
A COMPLAINT WAS FILED WITH THE COUNCIL OF JUDGES AND PROSECUTORS
AGAINST THE JUDGE WHO ISSUED THE INJUNCTION IN RETURN FOR AN EXCEPTIONALLY LOW AMOUNT OF COLLATERAL
05.01.2021
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED WITH PROSECUTOR
A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT WAS FILED
ALLEGING THAT THE OPERATOR HAD ATTEMPTED TO SUBMIT FORGED PROMISSORY NOTES
12.01.2021
OUR EVICTION CASE FILED IN PEACE COURT
THE CIVIL COURT OF PEACE DISMISSED THE MUNICIPALITY'S EVICTION CASE
ON 11 JANUARY 2021, RULING THAT THE CIVIL COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE HAD JURISDICTION
19.01.2021
OUR APPEAL AGAINST THE INJUNCTION
THE MUNICIPALITY'S APPEAL AGAINST THE INJUNCTION
WAS REJECTED, LEAVING THE ORDER THAT BLOCKED EVICTION IN PLACE
04.03.2021
IN LAWSUIT FILED BY OPERATOR
IN THE OPERATOR'S LAWSUIT
THE MUNICIPALITY ASKED THE COURT TO PLACE ANKAPARK TEMPORARILY IN ITS CUSTODY
05.03.2021
THIS REQUEST WAS REJECTED BY THE COURT
THE COURT REJECTED THIS REQUEST
17.03.2021
THE FILE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION BY PEACE COURT
AFTER THE CIVIL COURT OF PEACE RULED THAT IT LACKED JURISDICTION
THE CASE FILE WAS TRANSFERRED TO THE CIVIL COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
23.03.2021
IN LAWSUIT FILED BY OPERATOR
IN THE OPERATOR'S LAWSUIT
THE MUNICIPALITY APPEALED THE REJECTION OF ITS MARCH 2021 REQUEST FOR INTERIM RELIEF
07.04.2021
UPON TRANSFER TO CIVIL COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
AFTER THE CASE REACHED THE CIVIL COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
THAT COURT ALSO DECLINED JURISDICTION, RULING THAT THE CIVIL COURT OF PEACE SHOULD HEAR THE CASE. THE FILE REMAINED IN LIMBO OVER JURISDICTION ALONE
28.04.2021
IN LAWSUIT FILED BY OPERATOR
FOLLOWING AN ON-SITE INSPECTION IN THE OPERATOR'S LAWSUIT
THE EXPERT REPORT ASSESSED THE DAMAGE AT ₺112,325,000 AND FOUND THAT TERMINATION OF THE CONTRACT WAS JUSTIFIED
06 - 18.05.2021
IN LAWSUIT FILED BY OPERATOR
IN THE OPERATOR'S LAWSUIT
THE MUNICIPALITY TWICE MORE ASKED THE COURT TO PLACE THE SITE TEMPORARILY IN ITS CUSTODY IN RETURN FOR COLLATERAL SET BY THE COURT
02.06.2021
IN LAWSUIT FILED BY OPERATOR
IN THE OPERATOR'S LAWSUIT
THE COURT DISMISSED THE MUNICIPALITY'S APPEAL AGAINST THE REJECTION OF ITS 23 MARCH 2021 REQUEST FOR INTERIM RELIEF
07.06.2021
MEANWHILE FOLLOWING THE 28 APRIL 2021 EXPERT REPORT
AFTER THE 28 APRIL 2021 EXPERT REPORT WAS SERVED ON THE MUNICIPALITY
THE MUNICIPALITY ASKED THE COURT TO LIFT THE INJUNCTION IMMEDIATELY
09.06.2021
WHEN BOTH COURTS DECIDED LACK OF JURISDICTION
AFTER BOTH LOWER COURTS DECLINED JURISDICTION
THE REGIONAL COURT RULED THAT THE CIVIL COURT OF PEACE HAD JURISDICTION AND SENT IT THE FILE. THAT COURT SCHEDULED A HEARING FOR 10 NOVEMBER 2021
23.06.2021
IN LAWSUIT FILED BY OPERATOR
IN THE OPERATOR'S LAWSUIT
DESPITE THE EXPERT REPORT SUPPORTING THE MUNICIPALITY'S POSITION, THE COURT REJECTED ITS 7 JUNE REQUEST TO LIFT THE INJUNCTION
13.09.2021
LAWSUIT FILED BY OPERATOR
THE OPERATOR'S LAWSUIT
WAS DISMISSED BY THE COURT
06.10.2021
THE COURT DECISION DISMISSING OPERATOR'S LAWSUIT
THE MUNICIPALITY SUBMITTED THE JUDGMENT DISMISSING THE OPERATOR'S LAWSUIT
TO THE DISTRICT GOVERNOR'S OFFICE IN SUPPORT OF ITS EVICTION REQUEST
21.10.2021
TO SPEED UP THE EVICTION PROCESS DELAYED BY JURISDICTIONAL DECISIONS
TO EXPEDITE THE EVICTION CASE AFTER DELAYS OVER JURISDICTION
THE MUNICIPALITY SUBMITTED EXPERT REPORTS FROM THE EARLIER CASES, ASKED THE COURT TO ACCEPT THEM AS EVIDENCE, AND SOUGHT AN IMMEDIATE EVICTION ORDER WITHOUT ANOTHER INSPECTION OR EXPERT REVIEW
28.02.2022
AT THE HEARING OF THE EVICTION LAWSUIT FILED BY OUR MUNICIPALITY
AT A HEARING IN THE MUNICIPALITY'S EVICTION CASE
ALTHOUGH THERE WAS NO LEGAL NEED TO DO SO, THE COURT DECIDED TO WAIT FOR THE OPERATOR'S SEPARATE CASE FILE TO RETURN FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL
25.03.2022
A PETITION WAS SUBMITTED TO THE COURT
THE MUNICIPALITY PETITIONED THE COURT
ASKING IT TO REVERSE THE ERRONEOUS STAY WITHOUT DELAY
25.03.2022
MEANWHILE THE OPERATOR OF THE PARK
THE PARK OPERATOR
WAS FORMALLY DECLARED BANKRUPT
28.03.2022
APPEAL COURT WAS NOTIFIED OF OPERATOR'S BANKRUPTCY
THE COURT OF APPEAL WAS NOTIFIED OF THE OPERATOR'S BANKRUPTCY
THE MUNICIPALITY ALSO REPORTED THEFTS AND THE PARK'S CONTINUING DETERIORATION, ASKING THE COURT TO LIFT THE INJUNCTION IMMEDIATELY OR EXPEDITE ITS APPEAL REVIEW
04.04.2022
OPERATOR COMPANY'S BANKRUPTCY DECISION WAS
THE OPERATOR'S BANKRUPTCY RULING WAS SUBMITTED
TO THE DISTRICT GOVERNOR'S OFFICE WITH THE MUNICIPALITY'S THIRD REQUEST FOR EVICTION
08.04.2022
AN EXPEDITED MOTION WAS FILED AGAIN
THE MUNICIPALITY AGAIN ASKED THE COURT OF APPEAL
TO EXPEDITE ITS REVIEW OF THE FILE
08.04.2022
AN APPLICATION WAS MADE TO THE COURT
THE MUNICIPALITY ASKED THE COURT TO DETERMINE
WHETHER THE OPERATOR HAD LEFT ANKAPARK UNPROTECTED AND CREATED A SECURITY FAILURE
01.06.2022
DISCOVERY AND EXPERT INSPECTION BY COURT
A COURT-ORDERED INSPECTION AND EXPERT REVIEW
CONFIRMED THE SECURITY FAILURE CREATED BY THE OPERATOR. DESPITE THIS FINDING, THE PARK WAS NOT HANDED OVER TO THE MUNICIPALITY
15.06.2022
COURT REVERSED ITS ERRONEOUS STAY DECISION
AT THE MUNICIPALITY'S REQUEST, THE COURT REVERSED ITS ERRONEOUS STAY
IN THE EVICTION CASE AND SCHEDULED A HEARING FOR 6 JULY
16.06.2022
REGIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE DISMISSED
THE REGIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
DISMISSED THE OPERATOR'S APPEAL
06.07.2022
OUR EVICTION LAWSUIT WAS ACCEPTED AND COURT
THE COURT UPHELD THE MUNICIPALITY'S EVICTION CLAIM
AND ORDERED THE OPERATOR TO VACATE THE ANKAPARK SITE
07.07.2022
REGIONAL COURT DECISION AND EVICTION DECREE WERE
THE MUNICIPALITY SUBMITTED THE APPELLATE JUDGMENT AND EVICTION ORDER
TO THE DISTRICT GOVERNOR'S OFFICE WITH ITS FOURTH REQUEST FOR HANDOVER OF THE SITE
18.07.2022
FINALLY OUR MUNICIPALITY'S REQUEST WAS ACCEPTED
THE DISTRICT GOVERNOR'S OFFICE FINALLY APPROVED THE REQUEST
AND ANKAPARK WAS FORMALLY HANDED OVER TO ANKARA METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY
25.07.2022
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED FOR SUSPECTED FRAUDULENT BANKRUPTCY
A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT ALLEGED FRAUDULENT BANKRUPTCY
BY THE OPERATOR, BUT THE PROSECUTOR DECLINED TO BRING CHARGES
25.07.2022
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST THOSE RESPONSIBLE
A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT WAS FILED AGAINST THOSE HELD RESPONSIBLE
FOR THE PARK'S DETERIORATION BEFORE HANDOVER, BUT THE PROSECUTOR DECLINED TO BRING CHARGES
26.07.2022
EVIDENCE LAWSUIT FILED TO DETERMINE REPAIR COSTS
THE MUNICIPALITY FILED A CASE TO DETERMINE THE REPAIR COSTS
REQUIRED TO RESTORE ANKAPARK FROM THE CONDITION RECORDED ON 18 JULY 2022, BUT THE REQUEST WAS REJECTED FOR LACK OF LEGAL INTEREST

Time Summary

11 Months
Remained Open
March 2019 - February 2020
3 Years
Remained Closed
2020 - 2022
15+ Files
Foreclosure Attempts
Fought to prevent seizure
801 Million $
Total Investment
38 Billion TL Today