CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 23 octobre 2003

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .sB8987CE9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s61ED8A2B { width:14.36pt; display:inline-block } .s61E420C2 { font-family:Arial; font-variant:small-caps } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s84D0D60A { width:8.36pt; display:inline-block } .s84582066 { width:4.99pt; display:inline-block } .s859E34A4 { width:11.02pt; display:inline-block } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sBB5E682E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sF604F523 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; font-size:14pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s41E9DBF5 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE3807D79 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:150%; font-size:8pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s24AC208E { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF004B676 { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sC02F3CD9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:150%; font-size:12pt } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2B868F03 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; line-height:150%; font-size:12pt } .s2342A031 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE4024500 { height:37.3pt } .s546C9D04 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s40B7A780 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4F2EDFF { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s145CCEB3 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sE8EB5753 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s6BBACBD8 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:20.15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:8.8pt; font-size:10pt } .sEEE3CE35 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:20.15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:8.8pt; font-size:10pt } .s633D160C { width:0.7pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sBF0FE613 { width:36pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s2CAF299C { width:17.93pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sB08680C6 { width:28.92pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sA841372F { width:3.14pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s1E6D5017 { width:30.57pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s160BBE39 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:20.15pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:8.8pt; font-size:10pt } .s9671CAED { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s7A3B44D7 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sA918FEC8 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.4pt } .s588BDBF1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sBED5F98F { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt } .sA5C4F8A9 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sEF8F76C5 { width:20.87pt; display:inline-block } .s93B30DFA { width:207.46pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .s60570E66 { width:233.81pt; display:inline-block }   THIRD SECTION FINAL DECISION Application no. 42790/98 by Hatice KAMALI and Others against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 23   October 2003 as a Chamber composed of:   Mr   G. Ress , President ,   Mr   I. Cabral Barreto ,   Mr   L. Caflisch ,   Mr   R. Türmen ,   Mr   B. Zupančič ,   Mrs   H.S. Greve ,   Mr   K. Traja, judges , and   Mr   V. Berger , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 3 August 1998, Having regard to Article 5 § 2 of Protocol No. 11 to the Convention, by which the competence to examine the application was transferred to the Court, Having regard to the partial decision of 23 November 1999, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case submitted by the applicants and the Government on 9   September   2002 and 15 July 2003 respectively, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicants, Hatice Kamalı, Ali Göknur, Mehmet Göknur, Şükrü Demir, Mehmet Hanifi Demir and Medine Göknur, are Turkish nationals They are represented before the Court by Mr A. Akıllıoğlu and Mr   A.   Aktay, lawyers practising in Ankara. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. The General Directorate of National Roads and Highways expropriated plots of land belonging to the applicants in İçel in order to build the Tarsus-İçel-Çukurova-İskenderun Motorway. A committee of experts assessed the value of the plots of land belonging to the applicants and these amounts were paid to them when the expropriation took place. Following the applicants’ requests for increased compensation, the national courts awarded them additional compensation plus an interest at the statutory rate of 30 % per annum. The applicants appealed and the Court of Cassation upheld the decision of the first instance court. In the beginning of 1998 the due amounts were paid to the applicants respectively. Details are indicated in the table below:   APPLICATION NUMBERS AND NAMES OF THE APPLICANTS DATE OF TRANSFER OF TITLE DEED TO THE LAND DATE OF FINAL DECISION BY COURT OF CASSATION AS REGARDS ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION (interests and legal costs are not included) (in turkish liras)   DATE OF PAYMENT 1. Hatice KAMALI 21.07.1994 12.06.1995 431.400.000 13.02.1998 2. Ali GÖKNUR 01.07.1992 27.09.1993   21.700.000 18.02.1998 3.Mehmet GÖKNUR 01.07.1992 24.05.1993   22.593.180 18.02.1998 4. Ali GÖKNUR 05.04.1993 14.04.1994   73.380.000 18.02.1998 5. Şükrü DEMİR Mehmet Hanifi DEMİR 22.10.1992   08.11.1993     46.668.725         18.02.1998   6. Şükrü DEMİR Mehmet Hanifi DEMİR 22.10.1992   08.11.1993     96.250.000   18.02.1998   7. Medine GÖKNUR 03.11.1992 19.06.1995 19.141.000 18.02.1998 COMPLAINTS The applicants allege that the rate of interest applied in the calculation of the additional compensation for expropriation was too low. They also complain of the delays in obtaining their compensation. In this regard they invoke Article 1 of Protocol No 1 and Article 6 of the Convention. THE LAW Following informal contacts between the applicants’ and the Government’s representatives, the Section Registrar was asked to assist the parties in reaching a solution to the matter. As a result, the Registrar addressed draft declarations to the parties. The Court received the following declaration from the Government: “I declare that the Government of Turkey offer to 22,950 (twenty-two thousand nine hundred and fifty) euros to Ms Hatice Kamalı, Mr Ali Göknur, Mr Mehmet Göknur, Mr   Şükrü Demir, Mr Mehmet Hanifi Demir and Ms Medine Göknur with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the application registered under no. 42790/98. This sum shall cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and will be divided up as follows: Ms Hatice Kamalı             7,000 EUR Mr Ali Göknur             4,700 EUR Mr Mehmet Göknur           2,000 EUR Mr Şükrü Demir, Mr Mehmet Hanifi Demir       8,750 EUR Ms Medine Göknur                500 EUR This sum will be payable within three months from the date of the decision by the Court ... This sum shall be paid in euros to a bank account named by the applicants, free of any taxes and charges that may be applicable. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.” The Court received the following declaration from one of the representatives of the applicants: “I note that the Government of Turkey are prepared to pay the sum pay 22,950 (twenty-two thousand nine hundred and fifty) euros covering pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs to Ms Hatice Kamalı, Mr Ali Göknur, Mr Mehmet Göknur, Mr   Şükrü Demir, Mr   Mehmet Hanifi Demir and Ms Medine Göknur with a view to securing a friendly settlement of application no. 42790/98 pending before the Court. This sum will be divided up as follows: Ms Hatice Kamalı             7,000 EUR Mr Ali Göknur             4,700 EUR Mr Mehmet Göknur           2,000 EUR Mr Şükrü Demir, Mr Mehmet Hanifi Demir       8,750 EUR Ms Medine Göknur                500 EUR I also note that this sum will be payable within three months from the date of the decision by the Court ... This sum shall be paid in euros to a bank account named by the applicants, free of any taxes and charges that may be applicable. I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of the facts of this application. I declare that this constitutes a final settlement of the case. This declaration is made in the context of a friendly settlement which the Government and the applicants have reached.” The Court takes note of the agreement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols and considers that there is no reason which would justify the continuation of the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention and Rule 62 § 3 of the Rules of the Court). For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to disjoin the applications; Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Vincent Berger   Georg Ress   Registrar   President