Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

CASE OF YILDIRIR v. TURKEYCONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE SAJÓ

Doc ref:ECHR ID:

Document date: April 5, 2011

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

CASE OF YILDIRIR v. TURKEYCONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE SAJÓ

Doc ref:ECHR ID:

Document date: April 5, 2011

Cited paragraphs only

CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE SAJÓ

In the present case, the Court deems it appropriate to fix a lump sum that would correspond to the applicant ’ s legitimate expectations of obtaining compensation for the approximate value of his house that was demolished by the authorities. In granting a lump sum, the Court is of the opinion that the applicant has no right to full compensation, as the guarantee of a right to full compensation in all circumstances does not necessarily apply since legitimate objectives of “public interest” may call for less than reimbursement of the full market value (see The Holy Monasteries v. Greece , 9 December 1994, § 71, Series A no. 301-A, and Jahn and Others v. Germany [GC], nos. 46720/99, 72203/01 and 72552/01, § 94, ECHR 2005-VI).

I find that the conditions for applying compensation below the full market value depend on very specific considerations which have to be narrowly construed, being exceptions to the general rule of full compensation. The existence of unique historical circumstances is present in the cases cited. There is no specific reason given for the approach taken by the Court, which grants the lump sum in view of the above-cited jurisprudence. The applicant submitted an expert ’ s report dated 2 June 2003, which had been approved by a declaratory judgment ( tespit davası kararı ) of the Ankara Magistrates ’ Court. The Government submitted a re-calculation, by updating the 2003 expert ’ s report submitted by the applicant. Under these circumstances there is a clear basis on which to determine the full value of the property at the time of the expropriation, and inflation is properly taken care of. It is of course very fortunate that the lump sum awarded equals the actual loss; but it is very unfortunate that the impression is created that the award does not reflect the full value, or that special circumstances exist in the present case to allow a departure from awarding full compensation.

[1] 1 Rectified on 18 October 2011: the text was “ for costs and expenses ” in the former version of the judgment.

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2025

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846