Search
document

Document text Analytics

EIGHT CASES AGAINST TURKEY

Doc ref: 19279/92;19303/92;40261/98;41578/98;42559/98;48990/99;49657/99;50915/99 • ECHR ID: 001-69850

Document date: June 21, 2005

Inbound citations: 1
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 0

EIGHT CASES AGAINST TURKEY

Doc ref: 19279/92;19303/92;40261/98;41578/98;42559/98;48990/99;49657/99;50915/99 • ECHR ID: 001-69850

Document date: June 21, 2005

Cited paragraphs only

Resolution ResDH(2005) 45

concerning the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights delivered between 30 January 2001 and 15 July 2004 (final between 30 April 2001 and 10 July 2004 ) in the 8 cases against Turkey (see appendix) concerning the administration ' s delay in payment of additional compensation for expropriation and the applicable rate of default interest

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 21 June 2005 at the 928 th meeting of the Ministers ' Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),

Having regard to the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the 8 cases details of which appear in the appendix to this resolution, delivered between 30 January 2001 and 15 July 2004 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once they had become final under Articles 44 and 46 of the Convention;

Recalling that the cases originated in applications against Turkey, lodged between 26 August 1991 and 10 May 1999 with the European Commission of Human Rights under former Article 25 of the Co n vention or with the European Court of Human Rights under Article 34 of the Convention by several Turkish nationals, and that the Court declared admissible the complaints that there had been a breach of the applicant ' s right to the peaceful enjoyment of their possessions due to the administration ' s delay in paying additional compensation awarded by the domestic courts for the expropriation of the applicants ' properties and due to the loss of value this caused as a result of the substantial difference between the default interest rate applicable at the time and the average rate of inflation in Turkey;

Whereas in its judgments between 30 January 2001 and 15 July 2004 concerning these cases the Court unanimously:

- held there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention;

- held that the government of the respondent state was to pay the applicants, within three months from the date at which the judgments became final, the amounts of just satisfaction (set out in the appendix to this resolution) to be converted into Turkish liras at the rate applicable on the date of settlement and that simple interest at an annual rate would be payable on the amounts (rates are set out in the appendix to this resolution) from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement ;

- dismissed the remainder of the applicants ' claim for just satisfa c tion;

Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;

Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform it of the mea s ures which had been taken in consequence of the judgments delivered between 30 January 2001 and 15 July 2004 , having regard to Turkey ' s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Conve n tion to abide by it;

Whereas during the examination of the cases by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent State recalled that measures had already been taken to avoid new violations of the same kind (see Resolutions ResDH(2001)70 and ResDH(2001)71 in the cases Aka and AkkuÅŸ against Turkey, respectively), notably through the entry into force on 1 January 2000 of Law No. 4489, which brought the statutory rate of default interest into line with the annual rediscount rate applied by the Turkish Central Bank to short-term debts (the latter rate is fixed and permanently reviewed, taking into account particularly the country ' s inflation rate) , and indicated that the Court ' s judgments had been sent out to the authorities directly concerned;

Having satisfied itself that on the dates indicated in the appendix, the government of the respondent state had paid the a p plicants the sums provided for in these judgments,

Declares, after having examined the information supplied by the Government of Turkey, that it has exe r cised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases.

Appendix to Resolution ResDH(2005)45

Details of the just satisfaction awarded to the applicants (to be converted into Turkish liras at the rate applicable at the date of the settlement)

Simple interest at an annual rate of 6%.

Case

Application

Date of judgment

Date of final judgment

Non-pecuniary damage

Pecuniary damage

Costs

Date of payment

GÖÇMEN and Others

19279/92

30/01/01

30/04/01

7000 USD

3200 USD

300 USD

15/08/01 + interests

Cela Åž EN and Keziban Åž EN

19303/92

10/04/01

10/07/01

2000 USD

6981 USD

300 USD

20/02/02 + interests

Simple interest equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points

Case

Application

Date of judgment

Date of final judgment

Non-pecuniary damage

Pecuniary damage

Costs

Date of payment

AYDIN Asuman

40261/98

15/07/04

10/11/04

130611€

10/02/05

BARANSEL and Others

41578/98

27/05/04

10/11/04

87000 €

11/02/05

ÖNER and ÇAVU Ş O Ğ LU

42559/98

24/06/04

10/11/04

215200€

500€

09/02/05

DÖNMEZ

48990/99

29/04/04

29/07/04

- [1]

26800 €

27/10/04

YAZGAN

49657/99

22/04/04

22/07/04

- 1

6500 €

1500 €

22/10/04

YAZGANO Äž LU and others

50915/99

22/04/04

22/07/04

- 1

3000 €

1200 €

22/10/04

[1] The finding of a violation constitutes sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage suffered.

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant