CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 26 juin 2017

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .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 } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s75A32C27 { 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 } .s8F670191 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }   Communicated on 26 June 2017   SECOND SECTION Application no. 42507/06 Mikail TÜZÜN against Turkey and 2 other applications (see list appended) SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern compensation proceedings brought by the applicants against relevant State authorities before administrative and military administrative courts. The expert reports taken out during the domestic proceedings assessed the amount of pecuniary damages suffered by the applicants to be higher than the amounts initially claimed by them. Nevertheless the applicants were only awarded the initial amounts indicated in their petition when they had instituted the proceedings. The applicants complain of the impossibility to claim the additional amount of pecuniary damage indicated in the relevant expert reports. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Did the determination of the applicants’ civil rights satisfy the criteria under Article   6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, were the applicants denied the right of access to a court, in respect of the amount of compensation established in the relevant expert reports (see Fatma Nur Erten and Adnan Erten v. Turkey , no. 14674/11, 25 November 2014)?   ANNEXE   No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Represented by   42507/06 17/10/2006 Mikail TÜZÜN 01/08/1960 Istanbul       34740/10 12/04/2010 Serkan ÖZBEY 18/05/1980 Kocaeli   Zennun BİÇER   39389/10 17/05/2010 Erdal ÇERİ 10/01/1974 Istanbul   Haluk KÖKSOY