Identification of Damages Arising from the Implementation of Municipal Projects for Adjacent Properties

It is evident that when public and civil-development projects intersect with private ownership, the implementing authority is obligated to pay the value of the property that falls within the designated project area. However, in certain cases, the implementation of urban projects leads to a decrease in the value of properties located adjacent to these projects, even though ownership of the affected properties continues uninterrupted. Under this assumption, and despite the fact that no direct encroachment upon the property has occurred, the question arises as to whether the municipality or the project executor bears liability for compensating the resulting damages. The data for this study were collected through note-taking from legal and jurisprudential books and articles, as well as from statutes related to the subject. Regarding the damages inflicted upon owners of properties adjacent to municipal projects, the final clause of Article 11 of the Civil Liability Act has been invoked by opponents of municipal liability as grounds for exempting municipalities from compensation, based on the belief that such actions fall under the exercise of public authority (a subject that has been examined and analyzed in a separate article). However, both from a jurisprudential perspective—where the principles of la-zarar (no harm) and itlaf (destruction), especially the principle governing constructive destruction (talf-e hokmi), recognize the necessity of compensation—and from the explicit provisions of the later statute, the “Law on the Acquisition of Land and Real Property for the Implementation of Public, Civil, and Military Programs of the Government,” enacted on February 6, 1980, which refers to the “assessment of damages” alongside “payment of property value,” the recognition of compensation within positive law is evident. This research examines the various dimensions of this issue.