CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 11 mai 2010

.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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .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 } .s598389F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .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 } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s85016119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:11pt } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .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 } .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 } .s85A66119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:14pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s2571CC02 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:14pt } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sE7C30868 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sE5338F84 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .s7714A00D { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:justify } .s31E56244 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5430232B { width:32.61pt; display:inline-block } .s6C0B4A35 { width:180.64pt; display:inline-block } .sF2E32F9B { width:36.61pt; display:inline-block } .s5F32E900 { width:208.31pt; display:inline-block } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s7BE5FA7D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s864EA35A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:0.2pt; font-size:11pt } .s6578C065 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:1.7pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sE1C80691 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:14pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left }   SECOND SECTION PARTIAL DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 846/07 by Gülsüm SAYAN and 6 other applications [1] against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 11   May 2010 as a Chamber composed of:   Françoise Tulkens, President,   Ireneu Cabral Barreto,   Danutė Jočienė,   András Sajó,   Nona Tsotsoria,   Işıl Karakaş,   Kristina Pardalos, judges, and Sally Dollé, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 21 December 2006, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicants are Turkish nationals. Their names, birth dates and present addresses, as well as the names of their representatives, appear in Appendix I. The facts common to all applications, as submitted by the applicants, are as follows. On various dates the applicants were arrested and then placed in detention on remand within the context of criminal proceedings against them. Subsequently, they were all acquitted. On termination of the criminal proceedings, they sued the Treasury, seeking compensation for both pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, pursuant to Law no. 466 pertaining to the payment of compensation to persons unlawfully arrested or detained. All applicants complain about the length of the compensation proceedings. The other complaints raised by the applicants and the specific facts relevant to the issue of the allegedly lengthy proceedings are set out in the table below. Additionally, the case and decision numbers of the impugned proceedings, which were brought on the basis of Law no. 466, appear in Appendix II.     No. Application no. Date of introduction Case-specific facts Total length of proceedings   Other complaints 1 846/07 Sayan 21/12/2006 - Beginning: 2/7/2002 First-instance court: 30/6/2004 Final decision: Pending before the Court of Cassation.   7 years and 8 months   Article 5 § 5: Lack of compensation for unlawful detention. Article 6: The non-payment of interest despite the depreciation of the national currency. 2 8359/07 Dağhan 7/2/2007 - Beginning: 21/4/2000 First-instance court: 7/6/2004 Final decision: 28/6/2006 Payment: 10/4/2007   7 years   Article 1 of Protocol No. 1: The non-payment of interest despite the depreciation of the national currency. 3 31511/07 Avşar 11/7/2007 -     Beginning: 11/10/1999 First-instance court: 7/3/2007 Final decision: Pending before the Court of Cassation.   10 years and 4 months   Articles 8 and 13: Merely invoking the Provisions. 4 44791/07 Adaman 10/10/2007 In 1999 the applicant was placed in detention on remand on suspicion of homicide. On 2/10/2000 she was acquitted. This judgment became final on 22/5/2002. Subsequently, she brought compensation proceedings under Law no. 466. Beginning: 2/1/2003 First-instance court: 30/3/2006 Final decision: 30/4/2007 Payment: 20/3/2008   5 years and 2 months Article 5: Unlawfulness of detention. Articles 6 and 13: 1) Lack of a fair hearing concerning the criminal proceedings against the applicant. 2) Insufficiency of the amount of compensation awarded. Article 1 of Protocol No. 1: The non-payment of the compensation awarded by the court.   5 61041/08 Özkorkmaz 26/11/2008 - Beginning: 23/5/2003 First-instance court: 15/6/2004 Final decision: 4/2/2008 (served on the applicant on 2/3/2009) Payment: not made at the time of application.   6 years and 10 months   Article 13 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1: Insufficiency of the amount of compensation awarded by the court. 6 30662/09 Sarıtaş 27/4/2009 - Beginning: 25/9/1998 First-instance court: 13/9/2007 Final decision: 5/3/2009 Payment: not made at the time of application.   11 years and 5 months   - 7 39148/09 Saday 10/7/2009 The applicant was arrested in 1995. On 3/2/1997 she was released pending trial and on 17/11/1998 she was acquitted of the charges against her. Subsequently, she brought compensation proceedings under Law no. 466. Beginning: 4/8/1999 First-instance court: 6/3/2009 Final decision: Pending before the Court of Cassation.   10 years and 7 months Article 5: Unlawfulness of detention and the lack of compensation. THE LAW   1.     The Court finds it appropriate to join the cases, given the applicants' common principal complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the excessive length of proceedings to which they were parties. These proceedings lasted for periods ranging from 5 years and 2 months to 11 years and 5 months. In applications nos. 846/07 and 8369/07, invoking Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, the applicants maintained that the amounts determined by the domestic authorities had not compensated their financial loss caused by the depreciation of the national currency, as no interest had been applied to the awards made under Law no. 466. The Court considers that it cannot, on the basis of the case file, determine the admissibility of these complaints and that it is therefore necessary, in accordance with Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, to give notice of them to the respondent Government. 2.     The Court has also examined the remainder of the applicants' complaints as submitted by them. However, having regard to all the material in its possession, it finds that those complaints do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or its Protocols. It follows that the remaining parts of the applications must be rejected as being manifestly ill-founded, pursuant to Article 35 §§   3 and   4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to join the applications; Decides to adjourn the examination of the applicants' complaints concerning the length of proceedings and the non-application of interest to the compensation awards under Law no. 466; Declares the remainder of the applications inadmissible.     Sally Dollé   Françoise Tulkens   Registrar   President       APPENDIX I     Application no. Applicant's name Birth-year Present adress Name of representative 846/07 Gülsüm Sayan   1982 Aydın Türkan Aslan, Izmir 8359/07 Eyüp Dağhan 1979 Istanbul Mükrime Avcı, Istanbul 31511/07 Serhat Avşar 1977 Istanbul Gülizar Tuncer, Istanbul 44791/07 Minire Adaman 1962 Mersin Havva Karakaya, Mersin 61041/08 Saim Özkorkmaz 1971 Istanbul Leyla Albayrak, Istanbul 30662/09 Şükrü Sarıtaş 1954 Izmir Ömer Öneren, Ankara 39148/09 Gülay Saday 1972 Adana Mustafa Çinkılıç, Adana     APPENDIX II   No. Application no. and name Information for observations   1 846/07 Sayan Aydın Assize Court - 30/6/2004 (E: 2002/268, K: 2004/269)   2 8359/07 Dağhan 1) Bakırköy Assize Court – 6/11/2001 (E: 2000/322, K: 2001/427) 2) Court of Cassation (quashed) – 28/2/2002 (E: 2002/239, K: 2002/370) 3) Bakırköy Assize Court – 20/11/2002 (E: 2002/9, K: 2002/419) 4) Court of Cassation (quashed) – 14/1/2004 (E: 2003/1809, K: 2004/84) 5) Bakırköy Assize Court – 7/6/2004 (E: 2004/79, K: not submitted) 6)Court of Cassation (upheld) – 28/6/2006 (E: 2005/6889, K: 2006/3877)   3 31511/07 Avşar 1) Bakırköy Assize Court – 5/5/2003 (E: 1999/427, K: 2003/96) 2) Court of Cassation (quashed) – 23/11/2004 (E: 2004/6579, K: 2004/6418) 3) Bakırköy Assize Court – 7/3/2007 (E: 2005/27, K: 2007/53)   4 44791/07 Adaman 1) Tarsus Assize Court – 9/12/2003 (E: 2003/226 – K: 2003/370) 2) Court of Cassation (quashed) – 16/7/2004 - not submitted 3) Tarsus Assize Court (lack of jurisdiction) - 7/6/2005 (E: 2005/37, K: 2005/132) 4) Mersin Assize Court (lack of jurisdiction) – 23/6/2005 (E: 2005/235, K: 2005/147) 5) Tarsus Assize Court – 30/3/2006 (E: 2006/41, K: 2006/95) 6) Court of Cassation (upheld) – 30/4/2007 (E: 2007/1192, K: 2007/3280)   5 61041/08 Özkorkmaz 1) Eyüp Assize Court – 15/6/2004 (E: 2003/240, K: 2004/392) 2) Court of Cassation (upheld) – 4/2/2008 (E: 2005/10183, K: 2008/917) 6 30662/09 Sarıtaş 1) Kocaeli Assize Court – 28/12/2001 (E: 1998/247, K: 2001/755) 2) Court of Cassation (quashed) – 17/9/2002 (E: 2002/1775, K: 2002/1778) 3) Kocaeli Assize Court – 2/3/2006 (E: 2002/269, K: 2006/40) 4) Court of Cassation (quashed) – 5/4/2007 (E: 2007/1548, K: 2007/2944) 5) Kocaeli Assize Court – 19/9/2007 (E: 207/167, K: 2007/286) 6) Court of Cassation (upheld) – 5/3/2009 (E: 2008/2064, K: 2009/2640)   7 39148/09 Saday 1) Adana Assize Court – 13/3/2002 (E: 1999/268, K: 2002/84) 2) Court of Cassation (quashed) – 24/2/2003 (E: 2003/69, K: 2003/68) 3) Adana Assize Court – 4/3/2004 (E: 2003/170, K: 2004/38) 4) Court of Cassation – not submitted 5) Adana Assize Court – 6/3/2009 (E: 2006/99, K: 2009/93)       1.     See Appendix I