CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 23 mai 2019

.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 23 May 2019   SECOND SECTION Application no. 66263/12 Veli YILMAZER against Turkey lodged on 16 August 2012 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the designation of the applicant’s property as forest land following a cadastral survey and the subsequent cancellation of his title deed. In 1958 the applicant purchased a plot of land, which had been designated as forest land during a forest cadastral survey (“Orman Kadastrosu”) in 1948, from the Treasury and received its title deed. During another cadastral survey carried out in 1994 the applicant’s title deed was not taken into account, on the grounds that the property at issue had already been classified as forest land in 1948. The applicant brought a civil action against the Treasury, seeking compensation for the loss of his property. The court awarded the applicant 91,61 Turkish liras. The applicant unsuccessfully sought appeal to the Court of Cassation. The applicant complains under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that the insufficiency of the compensation awarded by the domestic courts has violated his right to peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Did the deprivation of property in the present case impose an excessive and individual burden on the applicant within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention? In particular, was the amount awarded to the applicant sufficient in respect of the value of his plot? The Government are invited to submit copies of all the relevant documents concerning the applicant’s case, including but not limited to the minutes of all the hearings, the reasoned judgment(s) of the trial court, the decisions of the Court of Cassation, expert reports and the submissions of the applicant throughout the proceedings.