Court ruling and Northern Cyprus
May 5th 2009, 11:33 pm
#1
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,433
Court ruling and Northern Cyprus
Landmark court ruling means Britons could be forced to return homes in Northern Cyprus
Thousands of Britons with holiday and retirement homes in Northern Cyprus could be forced to return their properties to Greek Cypriots or pay compensation after a landmark ruling from the European Court of Justice.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...rn-Cyprus.html
Thousands of Britons with holiday and retirement homes in Northern Cyprus could be forced to return their properties to Greek Cypriots or pay compensation after a landmark ruling from the European Court of Justice.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...rn-Cyprus.html
May 7th 2009, 9:23 am
#2
Just Joined
Joined: May 2009
Location: in the tropics
Posts: 28
Re: Court ruling and Northern Cyprus
Thanks for bringing our attention to this issue - an important one to watch as it unfolds.
Lilian
Lilian
Last edited by liliand; May 7th 2009 at 9:24 am. Reason: spelling
Jul 18th 2009, 10:27 am
#5
Just Joined
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 21
Re: Court ruling and Northern Cyprus
Those affected by the Apostolides v. Orams case, as well as academics and others, have begun to speak up. The decision took many by surprise -- not least the European Commission, see http://bit.ly/nimQK and it has disturbed the reunification negotiations.
At least one senior QC believes that the ECJ judgment is so lacking in substance (but no less valid for that; civil-law judgments are often brief) that the Appeal Court will return it to the ECJ with further questions.
There are also plans (as suggested by a previous posting) for ethnic Turks to submit claims in the Republic of Cyprus courts. If, as history suggests, they are denied a fair hearing the credibility of the RoC legal system will be damaged and the theory that all EU justice systems are equally worthy of respect will lose force. The judgment flies in the face of the last ruling of the ECHR in Strasbourg, and that nothwithstanding the EU's claim to be bound by the European Convention on Human Rights.
Meanwhile, British and other owners of property in the North are looking at asset protection: the use of trusts and entities established in third countries such as the USA to avoid the reach of a RoC judgment.
The problems of Cyprus go back to Ottoman times, to the Treaty of Lausanne, and to Britain's eagerness to get out (except for the Sovereign Base Areas) at any cost. The so-called "Doctrine of Necessity" case http://www.uniset.ca/other/cs2/1964CLR195.html disregarded the Intercommunal Agreement and the Constitution and brought an end to Cyprus as it had been. The invasion by Turkish troops was a result of genocide by the ethnic Greeks, spurred on by the Greek colonels who wanted enosis. When Greece got rid of the colonels it was rewarded with EU membership. Cyprus membership followed more recently. The two memberships damaged any bargaining power by ethnic Turks, and the Orams case has capped that sidelining of the ethnic Turkish citizens.
Other issues are there too: the emigration of many ethnic Turks with RoC (and hence EU) citizenship; the immigration of thousands of Turkish peasants with no claim to status in Cyprus (but that is complicated by heavy inntermarriage"). And vested interests that make "justice" as irretrievable (and as irrelevant) as in the Palestine-Israel context.
At least one senior QC believes that the ECJ judgment is so lacking in substance (but no less valid for that; civil-law judgments are often brief) that the Appeal Court will return it to the ECJ with further questions.
There are also plans (as suggested by a previous posting) for ethnic Turks to submit claims in the Republic of Cyprus courts. If, as history suggests, they are denied a fair hearing the credibility of the RoC legal system will be damaged and the theory that all EU justice systems are equally worthy of respect will lose force. The judgment flies in the face of the last ruling of the ECHR in Strasbourg, and that nothwithstanding the EU's claim to be bound by the European Convention on Human Rights.
Meanwhile, British and other owners of property in the North are looking at asset protection: the use of trusts and entities established in third countries such as the USA to avoid the reach of a RoC judgment.
The problems of Cyprus go back to Ottoman times, to the Treaty of Lausanne, and to Britain's eagerness to get out (except for the Sovereign Base Areas) at any cost. The so-called "Doctrine of Necessity" case http://www.uniset.ca/other/cs2/1964CLR195.html disregarded the Intercommunal Agreement and the Constitution and brought an end to Cyprus as it had been. The invasion by Turkish troops was a result of genocide by the ethnic Greeks, spurred on by the Greek colonels who wanted enosis. When Greece got rid of the colonels it was rewarded with EU membership. Cyprus membership followed more recently. The two memberships damaged any bargaining power by ethnic Turks, and the Orams case has capped that sidelining of the ethnic Turkish citizens.
Other issues are there too: the emigration of many ethnic Turks with RoC (and hence EU) citizenship; the immigration of thousands of Turkish peasants with no claim to status in Cyprus (but that is complicated by heavy inntermarriage"). And vested interests that make "justice" as irretrievable (and as irrelevant) as in the Palestine-Israel context.
