CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 15 juillet 1999

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s9BD1BAAD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:22pt; text-align:center } .sDCF20F75 { margin-top:22pt; margin-bottom:16pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s4F502FC8 { margin-top:16pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center } .s11709F00 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s4064D662 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:4pt; text-align:center } .s911720A9 { margin-top:4pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center } .sD622F424 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:32pt; text-align:center } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5BB93D78 { margin-top:32pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:36pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s810C3978 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:36pt } .s47E2B0C6 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     INTERIM resolution DH   (99) 472 HUMAN RIGHTS APPLICATION Nos. 26121/95 to 26127/95 TURANLI AND OTHERS, TOPÇU AND OTHERS, TIRTIKLIOĞLU, KARAÇELIK AND OTHERS, KARAGÖZ, DUMAN AND AKIN AGAINST TURKEY (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on at the 677th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies) The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article   32 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”), Having regard to the report drawn up on 4 December 1998 by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 of the Convention relating to the applications lodged on 7   December 1994, 19 December 1994 and 23 December 1994, by Turkish nationals, Laçin Turanli and others, Zahir Topçu and others, M.S. Tirtiklioğlu, Zülfikar Karaçelik and others, Fahrettin Karagöz, Esaat   Duman and Alaattin Akin against Turkey; Whereas on 26 January 1999 the Commission transmitted the said report to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months provided for in Article   32, paragraph   1, of the Convention has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article   48 of the Convention; Whereas in their applications, as declared admissible by the Commission on 7 April 1997, the applicants complained of a breach to the right to the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions due to the administration's delay in paying supplementary compensation for compulsory purchase, including interest at the legal rate applicable at the time of its determination, this delay having led to an important shortfall between the value of the compensation as determined and the value when it was effectively paid; Whereas in its report the Commission expressed, unanimously, the opinion that there had been a violation of Article   1 of Protocol No.   1; Whereas at the 677th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, having voted in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1, of the Convention, and agreed with the opinion expressed by the Commission, held, by a decision adopted on 15 July 1999, that there had been in this case a violation of Article   1 of Protocol No. 1, Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the Commission in this case; Decides to pursue the examination of the present case, in accordance with Article   32 of the Convention with a view to adopting the final resolution.