Resolution CM/ ResDH (2012) 224 [1] Karataş and Yıldız against Turkey

Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

(Application Nos 4889/05, 4897/05, 24009/05, 33694/05, 37759/05, 42996/06, 43031/06, 43019/06, 43038/06 and 43054/06, judgment of 16/07/2009, final on 16/10/2009)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”),

Having regard to the final judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee in the above case and to the violation established (see document DH-DD(2012 ) 895E );

Recalling that the respondent State ’ s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide to by all final judgments in cases to which it has been a party and that this obligation entails, over and above the payment of any sums awarded by the Court, the adoption by the authorities of the respondent State, where required:

- of individual measures to put an end to violations established and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and

- of general measures preventing similar violations;

Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its above-mentioned obligation;

Having examined the action report provided by the government indicating the measures adopted in order to give effect to the judgment including the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see document DH-DD(2012 ) 895E );

Having satisfied itself that all the measures required by Article 46, paragraph 1, have been adopted;

DECLARES that it has exe r cised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and

DECIDES to close the examination thereof.

Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

Action Report Karataş and Yıldız and Others

Application s nos.4889/05,489/05, 24009/05, 33694/05, 37759/05, 42996/06, 43031/06, 43019/06, 43038/06 and 43054/06

Information submitted by the Turkish Government on 31 January 2012

The cases concern excessive length of civil proceedings ( between 15-17 years) on account of the fact that the first instance court judgments in the applicants ’ cases could not become final since they were not served to the Treasury for 11 to 13 years delays because of the non-payment of court fees for service, prior to the appellate stage.

B. Individual measures:

1. Just satisfaction:

The just satisfaction amount was paid to the applicants on 22/02 /2010 and the relevant documents were submitted to the Department for the Execution of Judgments of the EctHR .

2. Other individual measures:

Since the proceedings have been terminated, no other individual measure is necessary in the present case.

C. General measures:

1. Publication:

This case has been translated into Turkish and published on the official web site of the Ministry of Justice. It is accessible in Turkish, for free, on http://www.inhak-bb.adalet.gov.tr/.

2. Dissemination:

This case has been disseminated to the relevant authorities, namely, the Constitutional Court , the Court of Cassation, the Prosecutor of the Court of Cassation, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Justice.

Article 302 of the new Code on Civil Proceedings (Law no.6100) entered into force on 12 January 2011 and reads as follows:

“ (1) The parties may obtain the written judgment at any time regardless of whether or not the legal fee of the judgment has been paid.

(2) Non-payment of the remaining legal fees does not prevent the notification or execution of the judgment or the lodging of an appeal against the judgment.

(3) Any other article of the legal Codes, including the Code on Legal Fees (Law no. 492, containing contradictory provisions to this Article, shall not be applied.

(4) The finalisation of the judgment shall be determined with a signature of the judge or President of the court, together with the date and the Court ’ s seal at the end or the reverse side of the written judgment. ’’

Article 302 of the new Code aims at preventing any future similar violations as those found by the Court in the case of Karataş and Yıldız and Others . These provisions clearly indicate that any party is able to request the enforcement or notification of the judgment even if that party can not pay legal fees. The parties will also be able to lodge an appeal against a judgment. In other words, relevant national authorities will not be able to refuse the enforcement or notification requests depending on the lack of payment of legal fees.

The Government knows of no other new cases introduced before the Court with similar complaints that took place after the above-mentioned Article entered into force.

The Government notes that Article 302 of the new Code on Civil Proceedings unequivocally constitutes an effective and sufficient general measure for the execution of the judgment in question.

The government considers that the measures adopted will prevent similar violations and that Turkey has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 6 December 2012 at the 11 57 th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies .