CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 13 décembre 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s5362FFEB { width:4.87pt; display:inline-block } .sC3D571B0 { width:197.1pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s6108529E { 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 } .s598389F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .s32ABB12B { 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 } .s97028CF8 { 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 } .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 } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s5AA03353 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; font-size:10pt } .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 } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s8E8B00CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:0.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-0.45pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s8EB5F569 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super } .sD4DA6D70 { height:41.55pt } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 47497/08 Çiğdem ŞARKAYA and Afet SEÇKİN against Turkey and 14 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 13   December 2016 as a Committee composed of:   Nebojša Vučinić, President,   Valeriu Griţco,   Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, judges, and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS 1.     The applicants are Turkish nationals. Their names and birth dates, as well as the names of their representatives, appear in the appendix. In application no. 75193/10, the applicant, Mr Hikmet Kaya died on 14 March 2015 and on 29 June 2016 his heirs, Ms   Leman Kaya, Mr   Fikret Kaya and Mr   Can Kaya indicated their wish to continue the application. 2.     The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. A.     The circumstances of the cases 3.     The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 4.     The applicants all own plots of land. Following local land development plans, their plots of land were designated for public use. Subsequently, complaining about the decrease in the market value of the land and long-term uncertainty about the fate of their plots of land, the applicants initiated compensation proceedings before the civil courts. Their cases were dismissed and as a result they were unable to obtain any redress from the authorities. 5.     The details of the applications are set out in the attached table. B.     Relevant domestic law and practice 6.     A description of the domestic law and practice with respect to the Compensation Commission mentioned below (paragraph 10) may be found in Paksoy and Others v. Turkey ((dec.), no. 19474/10, 7 June 2016). COMPLAINT 7.     The applicants complained under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that as a result of the restrictions imposed on their land, their right to peaceful enjoyment of their possessions had been breached. In this connection, they claimed that the restrictions substantially decreased the market value of their land, caused uncertainty and restricted the use of their property. Furthermore, the applicants pointed out that because of the failure of the authorities to compensate them for damage resulting from the said interference, they had to bear an excessive burden. THE LAW 8.     The Court considers that, in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court, the applications should be joined, given their similar factual and legal background. 9.     The applicants complained under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that the restriction imposed on their land as a result of the local land development plans constituted a disproportionate burden and thus breached their right to peaceful enjoyment of their possessions. 10.     The Government noted that pursuant to Law no. 6384 a new Compensation Commission had been established in Turkey to deal with applications concerning the length of proceedings, the delayed execution of judgments and the non-execution of judgments. They further noted that the competence of the Compensation Commission was subsequently enlarged by decrees adopted on 16 March 2014 and 9 March 2016 to examine complaints relating to, among other things, the alleged breaches of the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions on account of applicants’ inability to use their land as a result of restrictions imposed by the local land development plans. Accordingly, they maintained that the applicants had not exhausted domestic remedies, as they had not made any application to the Compensation Commission. 11.     The Court observes that, as pointed out by the Government, a new domestic remedy has been established in Turkey following the application of the pilot judgment procedure in the case of Ümmühan Kaplan v. Turkey (no.   24240/07, 20 March 2012). Subsequently, in its decision in the case of Paksoy and Others v. Turkey ((dec.), no. 19474/10, 7 June 2016), the Court declared the application inadmissible on the ground that the applicants had failed to exhaust domestic remedies, that is to say the new remedy. In so doing, the Court considered in particular that this new remedy was a priori accessible and capable of offering a reasonable prospect of redress for complaints concerning the restrictions imposed on the applicants’ land because their land was designated for public use by local land development plan. 12.     The Court notes that in its decision in the case of Ümmühan Kaplan (cited above, § 77), it stressed that it could nevertheless examine, under its normal procedure, applications of that type which had already been communicated to the Government. 13.     However, taking into account the Government’s preliminary objection with regard to the applicants’ failure to make use of the new domestic remedy established by Law no. 6384, the Court reiterates its conclusion in the case of Paksoy and Others , cited above. 14.     In view of the above, the Court concludes that the applicants’ complaints should be rejected under Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention for non ‑ exhaustion of domestic remedies. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications inadmissible.   Done in English and notified in writing on 19 January 2017.   Hasan Bakırcı   Nebojša Vučinić Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX Application no. and case name Introduction date The Applicant’s name and date of birth   Name of the Representative Details of the land in dispute and the date on which the restriction was imposed on the land Date and no. of the first instance court decision that rejected the compensation claim Date and no. of the Court of Cassation’s final decision 47497/08 Şarkaya and Seçkin 26/09/2008 Çiğdem ŞARKAYA 1937   Afet SEÇKİN 1934 Suner DAĞTEKİN, Antalya Antalya, Merkez, Hurma District, Block No. 12131 Parcel No.   3(old)/6-7(new)   1995 15/05/2007 Antalya Civil Court, E. 2006/4 K. 2007/108 21/04/2008 E.2008/4092 K.2008/5199   3492/09 Arslan 05/01/2009 Gülseren ARSLAN 1940   Ruşen ARSLAN, Istanbul Adana, Seyhan, Kurttepe District Plot No. 8284, Parcel No. 3   04/12/1998 27/05/2008 Adana Civil Court, E. 2008/139 K. 2008/188   27/04/2009 E.2009/2988 K. 2009/6374     55534/09 Kervan and Albayrak 09/09/2009 Hanife KERVAN 1943   Feriha ALBAYRAK 1959   Ferda KERVAN 1967   Muhammet Cihat KERVAN 1968   Sabiha KERVAN 1971   Ali Nihat KERVAN 1973 Ersoy GÜNAY, Istanbul Kocaeli, Gebze, Muallimköy District Plot No. 31, Parcel No. 1498   18/03/1998 13/02/2008 Gebze Civil Court, E   . 2007/214 K   . 2008/71 17/02/2009 E.2009/169 K. 2009/2144   64630/09 Satan and Others 01/12/2009 Menduh SATAN 1965   Mustafa TEKİNALP 1951   Fesih TEKİNALP 1966 Osman Kudret SÖNMEZ, İzmir İzmir, Bornova, Kazımdirik District Block No. 3849 Parcel No. 1   1982   24/11/2008 İzmir Civil Court, E. 2007/346 K. 2008/392 19/10/2009 E.2009/11105 K.2009/12911 6630/10 Öğün 28/12/2009 Süleyman ÖĞÜN 1945   Fatih ÖĞÜN 1948   Şükran ÖĞÜN 1954   Mürsel ÖĞÜN 1959   Oktay POLAT, Ankara Ankara, Çankaya, 5 th District, Block No. 6117, Parcel No. 20   31/07/1987 10/06/2008, Ankara Civil Court, E. 2008/189 K. 2008/198 12/10/2009 E.2009/9267 K.2009/11911   26034/10 Köse 12/04/2010 Erol KÖSE 1951   Şaban ÖZTÜRK, Kayseri Kayseri, Kocasinan, Argıncık District Plot No. 449 Parcel No. 5180   28/12/2001 29/07/2008, Kayseri Civil Court, E. 2008/190 K. 2008/370 12/10/2009 E.2009/9921 K.2009/11813     38645/10 Güner 01/06/2010 Aytaç GÜNER 1945   Onur ULUOCAK, İstanbul Osmaniye, Merkez, Raufbey District Plot No. 4, Block No. 37, Parcel No.19   09/04/2003 24/02/2009 Osmaniye Civil Court, E   . 2008/362 K   . 2009/74   21/12/2009 E.2009/16348 K. 2009/18226   41917/10 Poyraz 02/07/2010 Nesrin POYRAZ 1933     Istanbul, Pendik, 2 nd District (Batı) Plot No. 93, Block No. 659, Parcel No.51   31/01/2000 31/03/2009 Pendik Civil Court, E   . 2007/397 K   . 2009/61 05/04/2010 E.2010/5201 K.2010/5620   47477/10 Bilgiç 28/06/2010 Nedim BİLGİÇ 1955   Alper Tunga BACANLI, Antalya Antalya, Merkez, Hurma District Block No. 12131, Parcel No. 6   1998 03/12/2008 Antalya Civil Court, E   . 2007/200 K   . 2008/538 01/03/2010 E.2009/16714 K.2010/3006 55043/10 Güven 29/07/2010 Turgut GÜVEN 1948   Ayça KAYA, Ankara Istanbul, Bağcılar, Mahmutbey District, Plot no. 245 DS II-B, Block no. 271, Parcel No. 1   20/06/1990 02/05/2008 Bakırköy Civil Court, E. 2007/583 K. 2008/221 05/04/2010 E.2010/4349 K. 2010/5725 57522/10 Tetik and Others 16/08/2010 Musa TETİK 1943   Hasan TETİK 1953   Aydin TETİK 1966   Bilal BEĞENDİ 1953   Cemal BEĞENDİ 1958   Nuriye AŞIK 1958   Fahriye ÇELİK 1962   Fikriye YILDIRIM 1958 Alev TETİK HORUŞ, Ankara Ankara, Yenimahalle, 3 rd District, Ergazi, Block No. 42990, Parcel No. 1   26/02/1998 22/04/2008 Ankara Civil Court, E. 2006/507 K. 2008/152 22/02/2010 E.2009/17998 K.2010/2471 60898/10 Meşe 07/09/2010   Güllüzar MEŞE 1978   İdris KÖYLÜ, Antalya Antalya, Merkez, 3. Bölge, Block No. 7269, Parcel No. 4   1989 04/11/2008 Antalya Civil Court, E.2007/384 K.2008/344 14/06/2010 E.2010/6497 K.2010/11047 74534/10 Mercan and Orhan 19/10/2010 Kezban MERCAN 1927   Fikriye MERCAN 1951   Selahattin MERCAN 1959   Seyfettin MERCAN 1953   Sertap MERCAN 1955   Ümit ORHAN 1975   Mehmet ORHAN 1967   Hulusi ORHAN 1965 Ali GÖYMEN, Ankara Ankara, Yenimahalle, Çayyolu District, Block no. 42026, Parcel No. 1   1992 21/07/2009 Ankara Civil Court, E. 2008/21 K. 2009/283 26/10/2010 E.2010/11746 K. 2010/18207 75193/10 Kaya 06/12/2010 Leman KAYA 1964   Fikret KAYA 1984   Can KAYA 1998 H. Hüseyin BÜBERAL, Istanbul Istanbul, Üsküdar, Kısıklı District, Plot No. 161/1 Block No. 2461, Parcels Nos. 1, 2 and 4   17/04/1995 17/12/2009 Üsküdar Civil Court, E. 2009/678 K. 2009/257 01/11/2010 E.2010/12510K. 2010/18677 50327/12 Arı 25/05/2012 Bekir ARI 1959 Izmir   Sibel Ünlü HASDEMİR, İzmir İzmir, Aliağa, Köycivarı District Plot No. 1 Parcel No.   5804   1975 24/02/2010 Aliağa Civil Court, E. 2009/326 K. 2010/84 25/10/2011 E.2011/11634 K.2011/17078