CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 26 octobre 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 }   Communicated on 26 October 2018   SECOND SECTION Application no. 53009/09 Hüseyin ÇAVUŞ against Turkey lodged on 16 September 2009 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s deprivation of his vehicle without having been paid any compensation in return. The applicant’s vehicle was seized by the customs authorities as a guaranty in order to secure the payment of his tax debts. Subsequently, the applicant paid the customs debt. However, his request to receive the vehicle back was rejected by the authorities as it had already been sold to a third person in a public auction, on account of the applicant’s failure to reclaim the vehicle within three-months from the date of seizure. The applicant complains of a violation of his rights under Article   1 of Protocol   No.   1 to the Convention. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES Has the applicant been deprived of his possessions in the public interest, and in accordance with the conditions provided for by law, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No.   1?   If so, was that deprivation necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or penalties?   Did that deprivation impose an excessive individual burden on the applicant, taking into account that he could not receive any compensation for his vehicle although he had fully paid the taxes and penalties imposed on him?