BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Selahattin Mujdat AKTURK and Others and AniS AKIN and Others v Turkey - 10910/04 [2010] ECHR 126 (12 January 2010) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/126.html Cite as: [2010] ECHR 126 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Applications nos.
10910/04 and 10923/04
by Selahattin Müjdat AKTÜRK and
Others and Aniş AKIN and Others
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 12 January 2010 as a Chamber composed of:
Françoise
Tulkens,
President,
Ireneu
Cabral Barreto,
Vladimiro
Zagrebelsky,
Danutė
Jočienė,
Dragoljub
Popović,
Nona
Tsotsoria,
Işıl
Karakaş,
judges,
and Françoise Elens-Passos,
Deputy Section Registrar.
Having
regard to the above applications lodged on 6 July 1998,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants, whose names appear in the appendix hereto, are Turkish nationals who live in Ankara. They are represented before the Court by Mr S. Sarıkaya, a lawyer practising in Ankara. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent. Relying on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, the applicants complained of the delayed payment of their additional expropriation compensation and the resulting loss they suffered in view of the low interest rates.
THE LAW
The Court finds in the first place that, because of the similarity of the factual and legal issues involved, it is appropriate to join the present applications.
However, the Court further considers that it is no longer required to examine these applications, for the reasons elaborated below.
By letter dated 27 March 2009, the Government’s observations were sent to the applicants’ representative, who was requested to submit any comments, together with any claims for just satisfaction, by 8 May 2009. The applicants’ representative did not respond.
By letter dated 11 September 2009, sent by registered post, the applicants’ representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of the applicants’ observations had expired on 8 May 2009 and that no extension of time had been requested. The attention of the representative was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. According to the record of delivery, the Registry’s letter was received by the applicants’ representative on an unspecified date in September 2009. However, no response has been received to date.
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their applications, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the cases. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to join the applications;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.
Françoise Elens-Passos Françoise
Tulkens
Deputy Registrar President
Appendix
|
File No |
Case Name |
Date of lodging |
Introduced by |
|
10910/04 |
AKTÜRK and OTHERS v. TURKEY |
6 July 1998 |
Selahattin Müjdat Aktürk, Müjgan Ulusöver and Mehmet Selim Aktürk |
|
10923/04 |
AKIN and OTHERS v. TURKEY |
6 July 1998 |
Aniş Akın, Aydın Akın and Arzu Akın |