CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 13 décembre 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sAA66BAD8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .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 } .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 } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s354F7CEB { width:27.79pt; display:inline-block } .sDD97AF0 { width:154.44pt; display:inline-block } .sC30055DD { width:0.44pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s2A983CA3 { margin-top:30pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s3C33F117 { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 78648/14 Fatma SEVIMLI against Turkey and 7 other applications (see appended table)     The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 13   December 2018 as a Committee composed of:   Valeriu Griţco, President,   Jon Fridrik Kjølbro,   Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of applicants is set out in the appended table. The applicants were represented before the Court by Mr Adil Aktay, a lawyer practising in Mersin. In 2009 plots of land belonging to the respective applicants were expropriated by the administration. Relying on Article 1 of Protocol No.1 to the Convention, each applicant complained about the loss suffered as a result of the discrepancy between the value of compensation at the time of the application to the domestic court and its value when it was actually paid due to lack of interest. The applicants’ complaints in this regard were communicated to the Turkish Government (“the Government”), who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits on 22 February 2018. In their observations, the Government informed the Court that the applicants had died on the dates indicated in the appended table. By a letter dated 9 March 2018, sent by registered post, the applicants’ representative was asked to indicate by 30 March 2018 whether the applicants’ respective heirs wished to continue the applications. Upon the request of the applicants’ representative, the time-limit was extended until 24   April   2018. However, no response has been received. THE LAW Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the respective heirs of the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue the applications (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 the Protocols thereto which require the continued examination of the applications. Accordingly, the cases should be struck out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases. Done in English and notified in writing on 17 January 2019.   Liv Tigerstedt   Valeriu Griţco   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Date of birth Date of death     78648/14 05/12/2014 Fatma Sevimli 01/01/1928 07/10/2015   957/15 31/12/2014 Şerife Göker 17/12/1931 26/11/2015   2434/15 31/12/2014 Hüseyin Sarı 31/12/1931 28/11/2016   2463/15 24/12/2014 M. Salim Küçüksu 11/01/1933 06/04/2017   20156/15 22/04/2015 Hüseyin Sarı 31/12/1931 28/11/2016   22231/15 04/05/2015 Şerife Göker 17/12/1931 26/11/2015   26370/15 20/05/2015 Hüseyin Sarı 31/12/1931 28/11/2016   29300/15 27/05/2015 Mehmet Salim Küçüksu 11/01/1933 06/04/2017