CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 18 septembre 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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sA56BACAB { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; list-style-position:inside } .s13783063 { width:6.24pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s3537C2D6 { font-weight:normal }   Communicated on 18 September 2018   SECOND SECTION Application no. 62917/12 Fatma GENÇ and Others against Turkey lodged on 26 July 2012 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged de facto expropriation of part of the applicants’ plot of land in Diyarbakır. In 2000 the Diyarbakır Municipality started using the applicants’ plot with a view to constructing a road without having expropriated it. In 2008, during the course of the proceedings brought by the applicants for compensation, the Municipality issued a decision, deducting the part used as road from the applicant’s land as “contribution to planning costs” ( düzenleme ortaklık payı ), pursuant to Section 18 of the Zoning Law. The applicants’ case was eventually dismissed by the domestic court, which relied on that deduction and found that the situation could not be considered as de facto expropriation. The applicants complain of a violation of their rights under Article 1 of Protocol   No.   1 to the Convention. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES Did the authorities make any payment to the applicants for their inability to benefit from their property during the period starting from the Municipality’s use of their land without any decision to that effect until the deduction made in line with the new zoning plan? If not, has there been 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?   In particular, did the interference in the applicants’ right to property between 2000 and 2008 without compensation impose a disproportionate burden on him?     APPENDIX     Fatma GENÇ is a Turkish national who was born in 1946, lives in Diyarbakır and is represented by R. Yalçındağ Baydemir.     Ercan GENÇ is a Turkish national who was born in 1972, lives in Diyarbakır and is represented by R. Yalçındağ Baydemir.     Fikret GENÇ is a Turkish national who was born in 1966, lives in Diyarbakır and is represented by R. Yalçındağ Baydemir.     Remazan GENÇ is a Turkish national who was born in 1964, lives in Diyarbakır and is represented by R. Yalçındağ Baydemir.     Yılmaz GENÇ is a Turkish national who was born in 1980, lives in Diyarbakır and is represented by R. Yalçındağ Baydemir.     Nurcan KOLSUZ is a Turkish national who was born in 1973, lives in Istanbul and is represented by R. Yalçındağ Baydemir.