CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG5
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 28 juin 2011
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0628DEC003619406
- Date
- 28 juin 2011
- Publication
- 28 juin 2011
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleStruck out of the list
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s434D37A9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s88A92475 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sDD165512 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s635176F2 { width:141.94pt; display:inline-block } .sD2CA93FF { width:9.35pt; display:inline-block } .sF20E094B { width:195.62pt; display:inline-block } SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 36194/06 by Halil KARLI and Ali Haydar Özcan against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 28   June 2011 as a Chamber composed of: Françoise Tulkens, President, Danutė Jočienė, David Thór Björgvinsson, Giorgio Malinverni, András Sajó, Işıl Karakaş, Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque, judges, and Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 6 September 2006, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicants, Mr Halil Karlı and Mr Ali Haydar Özcan, are Turkish nationals who were born in 1942 and 1933 respectively and live in Istanbul. They are represented before the Court by Mr S. Canpolat, a lawyer practising in Istanbul. The applicants complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the contradictory judgments of the Court of Cassation concerning a property dispute. Relying upon Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the Convention, they maintained that their peaceful enjoyment of property was violated in that the administration had occupied their property without expropriation. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 of the Convention and Article   1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. On 13 July 2010 the observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were invited to submit their own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By a letter dated 15 March 2011, sent by registered post, the applicants’ representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of the observations had expired on 27 August 2010 and that no extension of time had been requested. His attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. However, no response has been received and the Registry’s letter was returned as the applicants’ representative could not be found at the address he had notified the court of. THE LAW The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine , the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the case. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases. Françoise Elens-Passos   Françoise Tulkens   Deputy Registrar   PresidentCitations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
- Formation
- 5
- Date
- 28 juin 2011
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2011:0628DEC003619406
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral