Can anyone Clarify Oram's situ

japeal



Joined: 12/09/2008
Posts: 1052

Message Posted:
07/05/2009 17:20

Why if you buy land/house from someone, you get a Kocan authorised and stamped by the government can someone else take you to court?



Surely the guilty party if there is any guilt has to be the original seller fraudulently selling the land compounded by the government authorising the 'illegal' transfer of the land?



Any compensation/fines should if proved to be due, come from the original seller and government.

madmazz


Joined: 14/01/2009
Posts: 82

Message Posted:
07/05/2009 17:22

The buyer is classed as buying stolen property, an offence punishable in most countries.

japeal



Joined: 12/09/2008
Posts: 1052

Message Posted:
07/05/2009 17:27

Madmazz, I agree if you are buying stolen property you are open to legal action, but if the government where you are living takes taxes and autorises transfer then they must be partly responsible for the buyer being allowed to buy the property as they compounded the illegal act.

madmazz


Joined: 14/01/2009
Posts: 82

Message Posted:
07/05/2009 17:42

And therin lies the rub, it is the individual buyer that is now being sought, fairly or unfairly, rightly or wrongly, the Orams case is an opened can of worms...........

Codger


Joined: 03/04/2009
Posts: 153

Message Posted:
07/05/2009 17:44

You are the one holding the parcel so you get clobbered. You can then, if you feel someone else is to blame for your misfortune or were party to it, sue them.

If you have bought property here and are looking for someone to blame stand in front of a mirror and there they are.



Relax and lets move on

Codger

harryroberts


Joined: 05/05/2009
Posts: 117

Message Posted:
07/05/2009 18:05

due dillegence is a word that springs to mind i have purchased property in several countries and did consider the trnc

after 10 mins browsing on the internet i realised it was not a safe place to buy for the following reasons.



No direct official flights

estate agents lies

cheapness of property

orams case

40,000 turkish troops

no solution after36 years



The biggest of all was the lie about exchange land there was never an agreed exchange of lands



too many lies by property developers and estate agents just to take your money

sienna


Joined: 09/01/2009
Posts: 1627

Message Posted:
07/05/2009 18:08

is this thread for real? is this a real question? surely not -

ROBIN HOOD


Joined: 26/05/2008
Posts: 238

Message Posted:
07/05/2009 19:45

The european court ruling opens up many unpalatable cans of worms with regards to the dispossed. What about all the Poles resited by Joe Stalin. What about teh Estonians, More poignent what about teh Germans forceably ejected by the Benes Decrees at the end of WWII the families had been there for generations. Now with this court ruling I can see a lot of litigation on the horizon.

japeal



Joined: 12/09/2008
Posts: 1052

Message Posted:
07/05/2009 19:55

Sienna



Yes this is a real question. I accept 'illegal' purchase if someting had fell of back of lorry etc, but in the Oram's situation thay bought in good faith from someone the land, had advocate do legal necessities, had builder build property, presume the builder carried out legal checks with government to allow them to build, have paid stamp duty etc, got kocan for land authorised, paid all taxes and it seems now things are in dispute it is all down to them. Why?



If you buy a car from someone who did not have the right to sell it then the police/legal system would chase the person who commited the fraudulent sale as well as the purchaser!

YFred


Joined: 06/05/2009
Posts: 1471

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 00:21

The Orams are not at fault here nor is the Turkish Cypriot that sold it to them. The fault is with the Republic of Cyprus government, who has a all or nothing policy as far as the solution to the Cyprus problem is concerned and has delayed the solution for 35 years trying to suffocate the Turkish Cypriots out of existence. The EU courts are very short-sighted about the matter by treating it as stolen land, which is nothing of the kind. It will go on for years and if the solution is not found, the Greek Cypriots will be losers in the end.

pilgrim



Joined: 11/05/2007
Posts: 1404

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 00:55

Note plenty of interlopers , getting on the bandbox since ruling, but bit premature I think, the Orams are the unfortunate pawns in the political game orchestrated by the ROC.

However the majority of other future claims will be find the path dogged by protective measures, legal buffers, counter claims, duplicity actions and high costs such that the current euphoria will soon fade away.

eager


Joined: 23/02/2007
Posts: 1272

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 00:55

But surely thats the whole point of the original question....They did do all the checks the legal way, the problem is that they were told a pack of lies, if the nc polititions want to have any credibility at all then now is the time to stand up and back the owners who were lead a merry dance all along.

halffull


Joined: 26/01/2009
Posts: 571

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 01:02

I think the Country and people are beautiful and I have purchased a property to live in this lovely place and who cares what will happen with these vindictive southern cypriots in the future either they will be dead or I will be but I shall enjoy my retirement in the meantime! Take me to court I don't own any property anywhere else, nor have any assets so bring it on!!

YFred


Joined: 06/05/2009
Posts: 1471

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 01:09

The orams did not have a fair trial in Nicosia. This will all come out in the wash. It has a long way to go yet. In any case the court accepted that they have no authority in the north, hence they are going after the orams estate in England. All new claims have to go through the property commision. What you see is the cases submitted before 2004.



There was no legal problem within TRNC. No amount of searching would have made a difference. This is a political issue and hopefully will be resolved by next February before Talat retires. If not Eroglu will be negotiating along the same lines. There is no way back for either side.

YFred


Joined: 06/05/2009
Posts: 1471

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 01:12

Enjoy your retirement. You have noothing to worry about. If I was the Orams' I would sell all in UK and buy a few more properties in the north, just to rub salt in the their faces. They can't touch them then.

deecyprus4


Joined: 27/07/2008
Posts: 3452

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 08:05

YFred..excellent advise..stick to fingers up to the gc's...I would love a gc to knock on my door and tell me my home is his...

Troodo


Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 1002

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 08:19

Spot the GC's postings anyone?



Troodo

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 08:51

in answer to japeal's original question "probably not"



so what is it that contributor's are actually clarifying hereabove?

they are clarifying their own viewpoint!

my point of view has always been that the cumbersome orams case, and perhaps others in its wake,

will never restore north cyprus to nicosia control, quite the opposite

but it is effective in refreshing the falsehood that one side rather than the other lost out



I will not bleat about critics because there are always two sides in any argument

but it may be worth looking at remarks by harryroberts:



"no direct official flights" and whose fault is that?

"estate agents' lies" this is the nature of the beast

"cheapness of property" a powerful argument in north cyprus' favour

"orams case" is all about the persecution of the elderly for political failiures elsewhere

"40 000 turkish troops" are doing a very good job

"no (so-called) solution after 36 years" it will be in 2010, and here's to the next 360

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 10:14

YFred. Good advice.

Jimmyboy63


Joined: 16/03/2009
Posts: 400

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 11:18

I think we all new the pitfalls and the element of risk here when we purchased...thats why the properties here where and are still so cheap.....you pay your money and take your chance!!!!



big deal the Orams lost there court case........so what happen's now..... the talk's collapse and NC becomes part of Turkey.



There may be a settlement and you may have to pay compensation, even so you are still getting a cheap property compared to other places.



So just carry on living the life and try not to worry and listen to scaremongerers!

Krawpy


Joined: 28/04/2009
Posts: 29

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 11:48

The judgement confirms that in the eyes of the international community:

1 There is no such thing as "exchange " land. This is an invention of the North regime mostly post 1983 when the TRNC was declared.

2. Such land as was held by dispossessed GC's before 1974 still legally belongs to them. They are unable to take possession due to the political situation but are now able to act against the assets of would-be purchasers if those persons own assets of any description within any EU state to recover damages for their loss.

A number of posts highlight the issues still to be decided and wax on about the physical safety of property which will be defended by owners, TRNC, Turkey etc etc. These posts entirely miss the point that the whole case was designed simply to undermine the property market in TRNC and impact very badly on the economy. Since all markets depend upon confidence, the Orams verdict has already worked for the GC's. Think about it -would you buy now for the first time ???.

TheSaints



Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 1369

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 12:49

Krawpy 2. Such land as was held by dispossessed GC's before 1974 still legally belongs to them. They are unable to take possession due to the political situation but are now able to act against the assets of would-be purchasers if those persons own assets of any description within any EU state to recover damages for their loss.



Incorrect, they would have to go throught the local remedy the IPC, this would not mean seizure of EU assets.

If you are going to scare monger at least do it in a believable manner.



The Orams case is a one off in that the IPC was not in place when it started and came about as a result of the case at the insistance of the ECHR for Turkey to come up with a solution for restitution of property in the TRNC or compensation.



This is the EU, ECHR recognised solution....

harryroberts


Joined: 05/05/2009
Posts: 117

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 12:54

your exactly right there are 2 sides to the argument and your comments comparing mine are correct.



the point i am trying to make is, do i want to invest in a country where there are disputes over land and property forget the 2 sides arguments im not in a position to say who is right and who is wrong (Greeks Or turkish).



i just want to invest in property and make sure my investment is good and not get involved in a domestic dispute.



im not really interested in the political issues

breezyboy


Joined: 14/05/2007
Posts: 1179

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 13:34

Might be somewhere else as well but if you go on Frank & Joans site they have the interesting press release from the President of TRNC on this situ.



It won't even be over when the fat lady does sing!!

rtddci


Joined: 29/12/2007
Posts: 842

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 15:28

TheSaints



"Incorrect, they would have to go throught the local remedy the IPC, this would not mean seizure of EU assets."



Where does it say this is the case? My reading is that GC's don't have to use the IPC, it's their choice whether to or do as MR A did. If it is correct I think that would be a good solution although I wonder where the money would come from.

TheSaints



Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 1369

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 15:40

rtddci,



The IPC was not in place when Mr A took action, it was as a result of this action that ECHR did not want to see more cases like this and instructed Turkey to come up with a local remedy for land and property disputes in TRNC.

Had the IPC been in place the Orams could have acknowledged Mr A's title ownership to land and refered the plaintif to the Local remedy and not responded to the court at all.

The IPC has been used up to now for nearly 400 claims, the GC's should make more use of it and probably will in the future.

TheSaints



Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 1369

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 15:59

rtddci



you may find this interesting, there are other links giving facts about cases resolved by the IPC.



http://www.mfa.gov.tr/_p_no_194---december-22nd_-2005_-press-statement-regarding-the-echr-judgement-concerning-the-application-of-a-greek-cypriot-national_-ms_-xenides-arestis-_unofficial-translation___p_.en.mfa

Dixie Normus


Joined: 22/02/2008
Posts: 820

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 16:26

Dont worry Japeal, I'll buy your house for 10 grand and donate another monkey to a charity of your choice, good time to buy just hope the case scares the crap out of a few hundred so bargains are to be had.



D.N

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 17:02

relax harryroberts,



you don't have to invest in north cyprus

if you prefer not to



reluctantly I have to go along with dixie normus

who appears to inhabit a place called...

(the name escapes me, sorry)



er...



oh yes i remember now:

"the real world"

Amber


Joined: 26/09/2008
Posts: 561

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 17:55

Dee, Message 17 ..... I would love to see that... a GC knocking on your door. Who needs the turkish army when we have you. Perhaps you are the amunition they need in these talks !!





(meant in a nice way !!) x

cooper


Joined: 23/10/2007
Posts: 3386

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 18:01

This is the article referred to in message 24 - http://www.frankandjoan.com/news/2009/may.htm



Cooper

japeal



Joined: 12/09/2008
Posts: 1052

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 20:10

Dixie,



Sorry not for sale more than happy here. My original question was meant to get opinions on why the Oram's alone in their situation seem to be isolated. my original point is surely legal actions taken and supported by govt must carry some responsibility in the Oram's situation. Also, where ha sthe Gc been living for 35 yrs, why did he not request assistance from ECJ or it's equivalent 10/20 years ago? Obviously political reason but why is the TRNC govt not fighting on behalf of the Orams, they have been happy to take taxes etc!



John

Moover321


Joined: 11/04/2009
Posts: 649

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 21:01

If you want to look at a reasonable attempt to clarify the situation have a look here:



http://www.wellestates.com/orams_ecj.htm



As to the question if it is safe to buy in Northern Cyprus I would guess that is a personal decision.



A pre-1974 Turkish or foreign owned title is safe.



Anything else is relatively safe if you have NO assets in the EU.



Though the government ministers in the TRNC have said they would guarantee the safety of purchasers they have no control outside of the TRNC so I guess like all political promises the devil is in the detail!



To answer your question why the GC did not take it to the ECJ before is simple - Cyprus only joined the EU in 2004.



Why is the TRNC not fighting for people like Orams? Becasue their remit is limited to the TRNC and the government is not 'recognised' anywhere else besides Turkey!



Finally, the Orams case is NOT an isolated case. It is what is termed a 'test' case. It creates political pressure for a solution!

rtddci


Joined: 29/12/2007
Posts: 842

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 21:39

TheSaints

I have just read again the AG's opinion in the case (sad I know). She specifically states (see paragraphs 55-73) that the fact that there is the IPC in TRNC is not relevent. The ECHR is basically meant for private people v public authority cases (private citizen v the government). As the Orams case is purely private then civil law stands.

Moover321

I don't think that an estate agents views in NC hold any water frankly.

" pre-1974 Turkish or foreign owned title is safe." Only if you have PTP and then the kocan can you say that.

cooper


Joined: 23/10/2007
Posts: 3386

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 23:10

This is the AG's opinion referred to in post 34 above - http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/gettext.pl?where=&lang=en&num=79918781C19070420&doc=T&ouvert=T&seance=CONCL

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 23:13

Re Msg 34



I am no lawyer but I too have just read the AG opinion and the ECJ judgement. What I find puzzling is that the questions put to the ECJ in the first instance did not raise the question of the IPC and, as far as I can see, there is no mention of it in the judgement they returned. Yet the AG spent a good deal of time considering it. Why???



But presumably because the ECJ Judgement is the output from this process the whole question of the IPC has still to be properly tested in court.

rtddci


Joined: 29/12/2007
Posts: 842

Message Posted:
08/05/2009 23:56

The issue as to whether the IPC was the only route to take was not one of the questions put to the ECJ as the IPC didn't exist in 2004. The AG though, has spotted the issue, I think anyway and answered it, perhaps to 'head it off at the pass'.

stusimpson


Joined: 06/08/2007
Posts: 178

Message Posted:
09/05/2009 00:36

Hi,



Just to save me trawling through all the posts as I'm sure its been answered before!



Is this recent ruling reciprocated i.e Turkish cypriots displaced from the South can try and seek compensation from the owners of land in the South(which is worth about 4 times as much).



If not why is that?



Thanks,



Stu



WWW.THALASSAOWNERS.COM

vincehugo


Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 208

Message Posted:
09/05/2009 02:26

Re Msg 37



It still seems curious to me that in this incredibly structured legal system the IPC should be raised by the AG. And surely, as the AG is only an advisor to the ECJ, if it doesn't appear in the judgement then it is still an open issue for the future (so it hasn't really headed it off at the pass).

Krawpy


Joined: 28/04/2009
Posts: 29

Message Posted:
09/05/2009 03:35

msg 38 - theoretically yes Stu but the initial court ruling would have to be a court in the EU jurisdiction. I.e not a TRNC Court. Not sure whether a GC court would hear a case brought by someone residing in the North. I suspect not.

pilgrim



Joined: 11/05/2007
Posts: 1404

Message Posted:
09/05/2009 11:40

Surely GC courts , can be forced to recognise , TRNC claimants, by the same logic visa versa the AJ has has applied to the Orams case.

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
09/05/2009 15:42

I find it very disturbing that the Orams have been subjected to this disgracefull litigation.

It is very clear to me that they undertook their development near Lapta with no criminal intent.



Mr and Mrs Oram have become a victim of a political war between to divided regions of the same Island.

Clearly both regions have their own laws,language and indeed culture. Mr and Mrs Orams have broken no laws of the TRNC, the region in which they live.

It is the case that the Laws of the ROC ( the region outside of influence upon the Orams property) have by stealth been accepted by the "World" as the precident upon the whole Island.

The reult is this destructive and upsetting civil court case that threatens not only the Orams but the Island generally.

Who could possibly suggest that these law abiding peacfull people are law breaking criminals.

Justice should prevail and the Orams deserve the full support of the UK as well as the TRNC.

Moover321


Joined: 11/04/2009
Posts: 649

Message Posted:
09/05/2009 18:19

Quite frankly no one knows what the final outcome of the Orams case will be till it is re-heard at the Court of Appeal in London in October 2009. It is likely that the court will uphold the ECJ ruling but and it is an important but they will ask for some guidance from the UK government on its public policy issue. Given where the Brown government is at present it is unlikely to take any real position on anything! If the case goes against the Orams then they will most likely have to pay some form of compensation. Quite how the UK court can get them to demolish their home in TRNC is another question - quite simply they cannot!



The problem for the Orams is that the Court of Appeal in London is UNABLE to review if the GC Court's process would be acceptable in the UK. That's becasue it is governed by an EU directive. So if the Orams have UK assets they may be forced to pay from those assets! If you have no assets in the UK or EU no need to worry about this ruling! Simple!

TheSaints



Joined: 28/01/2009
Posts: 1369

Message Posted:
09/05/2009 18:52

Krawpy again msg 38, you are wrong yet again.



TC's can make a claim in the South in the ROC courts but they have to live back in the ROC for a minimum 6 month period before they can initiate a claim.

There have been cases where a TC has gotten his land and house back, not many but some.

There has been some that have been offered some land but not thier land but can not have it until there is a settlement.

These documented cases have been mentioned on threads on this board in the past.

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
09/05/2009 21:09

AcesHigh.

Msg 43

It is most certainly the case that the Orams are indeed being funded by supporters. It may well be that the TRNC administration is behind this support.



The difficulty in the matter of support is that Mr Apostolides has taken out a civil litigation case. It is not and cannot be seen that political bodies and or governments are involving themselves in civil litigation cases.

I suspect that Mr Apostolides ( an employee of the ROC administration) is well aware of this and has ceased this opportunity to pursue political and nationalistic victory through the civil courts.

Regarding the Uk Court of appeal hearing later this year. I feel sure that the Judges will consider the simple fact that the Orams will simply not be permited by the TRNC admin. to demolish property upon an order that originated in the ROC. I feel it unlikely that a UK Court will make judgment against what is clearly a catch 22 scenario. However, it cannot be forgotton that the ROC now has uperhand

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
09/05/2009 23:16

harryroberts re: messages 6 and 23



I can see you are hardheaded in deciding that south cyprus is the wiser choice for you



does this mean you are expecting your title deeds, or is the property still mortgaged?

rtddci


Joined: 29/12/2007
Posts: 842

Message Posted:
10/05/2009 01:36

Moover321

"It is likely that the court will uphold the ECJ ruling but and it is an important but they will ask for some guidance from the UK government on its public policy issue."



The courts in the UK will never ask for guidance from the UK government on 'its public policy'. The Judiciary are fiercely independent of government. The courts will follow the law. It's for governments to make laws, the courts to interpret and enforce them.

newlad



Joined: 02/03/2008
Posts: 7819

Message Posted:
10/05/2009 01:55

Surely it is common knowledge that the court will uphod the verdict.

rtddci


Joined: 29/12/2007
Posts: 842

Message Posted:
10/05/2009 02:02

The Court of Appeal asked the questions and the ECJ gave them the answers. Be very strange if the court then didn't follow the ECJ ruling.

What gets me is the complete lack of leadership from the TRNC government following the ECJ judgement. What do they propose to do to assist those affected, if anything? Are they simply admitting that the whole 'exchange land' law was in fact a complete sham after all? Will the individual TRNC politicians care to declare just what money they have made out of the selling of land?

Moover321


Joined: 11/04/2009
Posts: 649

Message Posted:
10/05/2009 12:33

rtddci: I think you will find that the UK courts take guidance from the UK government on a whole host of issues. The government stepped in to stop the investigation of the Saudi arms deal stemming from the 1980's and the courts upheld its decision; UK Deportations to Algeria via the Special Immigration Appeals Commission; Certificates issued under the terrorism legislation; Cerificates issued in pursuance to recognition of Staes whether de fact or De Jure and so on and so forth!



Take a look at submissions of the TRNC: http://www.rrdenktas.com/kktc-cb_web_sayfalari/press/news/foreing_property_owners_enforcement.htm

cornish



Joined: 30/12/2008
Posts: 186

Message Posted:
13/05/2009 00:09

Harry Roberts says:



due dillegence is a word that springs to mind i have purchased property in several countries and did consider the trnc after 10 mins browsing on the internet i realised it was not a safe place to buy for the following reasons.

No direct official flights

estate agents lies

cheapness of property

orams case

40,000 turkish troops

no solution after36 years



The biggest of all was the lie about exchange land there was never an agreed exchange of lands

too many lies by property developers and estate agents just to take your money

your exactly right there are 2 sides to the argument and your comments comparing mine are correct.

the point i am trying to make is, do i want to invest in a country where there are disputes over land and property forget the 2 sides arguments im not in a position to say who is right and who is wrong (Greeks Or turkish).

i just want to invest in property and make sure my investment is good and not get involved in politics

cornish



Joined: 30/12/2008
Posts: 186

Message Posted:
13/05/2009 00:17

Well I would like to say:

1. Direct flights are prevented due to GC intransigence but could well come to an end due to US interet in TRNC.

2. Estate Agents lies - anything particular ? Are we not all aware of falsehoods from seller of almot everything and I'm sure the GC estate agents gaurantee their GC properties will have their title deeds with no problems - HA!!

3.Cheapness of property - and that's a problem ?

4.Orams case - GC propoganda machine rolls on.

5.40K Turkish troops ? How many GC troops are there? Why do they keep spending millions on missiles/tanks/attack helicoptors??

6. No solution for 36 years - Well I seem to remember the GC's turning down a perfectly fair if not advantageous solution in the 'Annan Plan' 5 years ago



If this gentleman is so keen not to have anything to do with this country - why doe he continually want to put North Cyprus down??



Well we all know why of course.

Bradus


Joined: 25/02/2007
Posts: 2641

Message Posted:
13/05/2009 00:22

Cornish,



I take it from your post above, that what you are saying is do not buy in the North or the South. Knowing that there are problems elsewhere does little to reassure purchasers considering the TRNC.