CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 10 octobre 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 30 October 2023   SECOND SECTION Application no. 61945/19 Celal ALTINÖZ against Türkiye lodged on 14 November 2019 communicated on 10 October 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application essentially concerns a judicial practice of the civil courts, in the context of urgent expropriation proceedings, to order the parties to pay a lump sum to the opposing party in respect of legal fees. It further concerns the lack of statutory interest for the additional compensation from the date the applicants lost possession of their properties. As regards the order to pay legal fees to the opposing party, namely the administration, the applicant complains that such an order decreased the expropriation compensation awarded to him. As regards the lack of statutory interest for the additional compensation from the date he lost possession of his properties, the applicant argues that he suffered a financial loss, caused by the depreciation of the compensation awarded, due to the monetary inflation during the relevant period. The applicant complained under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.     QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to peaceful enjoyment of his possessions within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention with regard to the urgent expropriation proceedings conducted under file nos. 2016/213 and 2016/305? In particular, in the light of the Court’s findings in the cases of Dökmeci v.   Turkey (no. 74155/14, 6 December 2016) and Musa Tarhan v.   Turkey (no.   12055/17, 23 October 2018) did the applicant suffer an excessive individual burden in the proceedings registered under file nos. 2016/213 and 2016/305?