Information Note on the Court’s case-law 66

July 2004

Fener Rum Erkek Lisesi Vakfı v. Turkey (dec.) - 34478/97

Decision 8.7.2004 [Section III]

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1

Deprivation of property

Annulment of recent titles to property of a foundation formed under the Ottoman Empire: admissible

The applicant association is a foundation set up under the Ottoman Empire which, o nce transferred to the Turkish Republic, had been obliged to enter its immovable property in the land register. A law of 1935 provided that the representatives of foundations transferred in this way were required to submit a statement indicating the nature and sources of their incomes and expenditure. In 1936 the applicant association’s representatives accordingly submitted a statement indicating the foundation’s aims and its immovable property. In 1952 and 1958 the applicant association acquired co-ownersh ip of two buildings on the basis of permits granted by the State. In 1992, referring to a 1974 change in the Court of Cassation’s case-law concerning foundations transferred from the Ottoman Empire, the Treasury applied for those property titles to be remo ved from the land register. The national courts ruled that the applicant association’s entry as co-owner was to be removed from the land register and ordered that the property titles be re-entered under the name of the former owners. In application of the 1974 case-law, the 1936 statement was to be considered as the applicant association’s founding document, setting out its articles of association. Since the foundation had not indicated in that document that it had the capacity to acquire immovable property , its possessions amounted only to those listed in its 1936 statement, which was to be considered as its authoritative articles of association. The applicant association unsuccessfully requested authorisation to amend its articles of association. The autho rities stated that, in application of the 1974 case-law, the 1936 statement was equivalent to the applicant association’s ‘founding document’ and held that, on public policy grounds, those articles of association could not be amended.

Admissible under Art icle 1 of Protocol No. 1, taken alone and in combination with Article 14.

© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.

Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes