CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 8 mars 2018
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-181934
- Date
- 8 mars 2018
- Publication
- 8 mars 2018
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 officielleCommunicated
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 } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .sAC521AF { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; 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 } .sD8E76205 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt } .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 }   Communicated on 8 March 2018   SECOND SECTION Application no. 50947/14 Ali Melih AKSOLEY against Turkey and 3 other applications (see list appended) SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern the registration as Treasury’s property of plots of land for which the applicants allegedly hold registered title deed. The applicants claim that a court decision confirmed that the title deed in question corresponds to these plots. Invoking Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, the applicants complain that they were deprived of their right to peaceful enjoyment of their possessions. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Does the applicants’ title deed correspond to the plots of land located in the district of Kartal which have been the subject of the proceedings complaint of by the applicants? If yes, did the registration of these plots as the property of the Treasury constitute a violation of the applicants’ right to peaceful enjoyment of their possessions within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention?   2.     In what way and by whom was the land in question used since the date of the cadastral survey?   3.     Having regard to the   State’s positive obligation to ensure in its domestic legal system that property rights are sufficiently protected by law and that adequate remedies are provided whereby the victim of an interference can seek to vindicate his rights, including, where appropriate, by claiming damages in respect of any loss sustained (see Blumberga v.   Latvia , no. 70930/01, § 67, 14 October 2008), were the applicants afforded a reasonable opportunity of challenging effectively the measures depriving them of their right to property or of obtaining an adequate redress? In this context, does Article 1007 of Civil Code afford the applicants a reasonable opportunity to obtain compensation? In particular, what is the time-limit for such an action and when did it start to run in the situation of the applicants? The Government are invited to submit the examples of judicial decisions rendered in comparable situations and showing the effectiveness of this remedy.   The parties are also invited to provide the Court with all relevant documents concerning the case (such as expert reports, a cadastral survey report, and the land registry records).       No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Represented by   50947/14 14/07/2014 Ali Melih AKSOLEY 30/03/1930 Istanbul   Noyan GÖKSU   50958/14 14/07/2014 Fatma Yüksel AKSOLEY 25/10/1934 Istanbul   Noyan GÖKSU   50961/14 14/07/2014 Yaşar Meral SUNAL 1/01/1957 Istanbul   Noyan GÖKSU   50963/14 14/07/2014 Mete AKSOLEY 18/02/1961 Istanbul   Noyan GÖKSU    Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 8 mars 2018
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-181934
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel