CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 23 février 2018

.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 }   Communicated on 23 February 2018   SECOND SECTION Application no. 16808/09 Ülken YÜCEL against Turkey lodged on 10 February 2009 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the decrease in the surface area of a land purchased by the applicant, which was caused by an erroneous entry in the land registry. The applicant complains under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that his right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions was violated in that he could not obtain any compensation for his loss. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No.   1 to the Convention due to the error in the land registry and the applicant’s inability to obtain compensation for the loss he endured as a result (see Gürtaş Yapı Ticaret Ve Pazarlama A. Ş. v. Turkey , no. 40896/05, 7   July 2015)? In particular, did that interference impose an excessive individual burden on the applicant (see Immobiliare Saffi v. Italy [GC], no. 22774/93, §   59, ECHR 1999 ‑ V)?