cta flights court case

gillybean


Joined: 22/10/2007
Posts: 68

Message Posted:
26/05/2009 19:25

has anyone heard what's happening in the courts @ london regarding the cta direct flight situation , as far as i'm aware the hearing finished last friday the mail online is still running last mondays headline.

Geejay


Joined: 18/04/2009
Posts: 475

Message Posted:
26/05/2009 19:28

If evidence has finished it may take some months for a decision. Don't hold your breath

pilgrim



Joined: 11/05/2007
Posts: 1404

Message Posted:
26/05/2009 19:45

Noticed there were greek lawyers in court objecting to petition for direct flights

Geejay


Joined: 18/04/2009
Posts: 475

Message Posted:
26/05/2009 19:47

Naturaly Pilgrim. They run interference all the time.

ilovekibris


Joined: 18/05/2009
Posts: 394

Message Posted:
26/05/2009 20:23

msg 3,



why would greece want to get involved?

greylag


Joined: 08/04/2009
Posts: 1110

Message Posted:
26/05/2009 20:24

Its my umderstanding that the talks finished last Thursday,with a decision to be made in the coming months,

G.

greylag


Joined: 08/04/2009
Posts: 1110

Message Posted:
26/05/2009 20:27

ilovekibris,

Greece are always involved if it means that the Turks are going to get one over on them,

G.

ilovekibris


Joined: 18/05/2009
Posts: 394

Message Posted:
26/05/2009 20:37

greylag,



from what i've been following Greece and Turkey have been good friends for years and both want to bang the Cypriot heads together for a solution. Is Greece definately involved?

pilgrim



Joined: 11/05/2007
Posts: 1404

Message Posted:
26/05/2009 21:44

Correction, greek cypriot lawyers, not greek .apologies

zcacmxi


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 388

Message Posted:
26/05/2009 23:06

I know that CTA did not get Greek Cypriot lawyers to represent them.



I can therefore only assume that the other side of the case, Department of Transport have obtained Greek Cypriot lawyers to defend their decision to disallow direct flights to Ercan.



With so many British Citizens disadvantaged and inconvenienced by this discriminatory decision, I am apalled that they are defending this case, at yet more cost to the British tax payer.



What do the British gain from disadvantaging Turkish Cypriots to the detrimate of even their own tax paying citizens? As far as I'm aware, the GCs started EOKA to get the British out of Cyprus, they don't want the British bases in Cyprus yet they always support them!

ianwfs


Joined: 08/01/2008
Posts: 563

Message Posted:
26/05/2009 23:47

They were there as an "interested party" in the case, as the argument is that the Chicago Convention has been misinterpreted, and the RoC does not have de facto control of TRNC air space.



Ian

greylag


Joined: 08/04/2009
Posts: 1110

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 01:14

Time for a change of law then arbee.My mind goes back to the Berlin wall,

G.

CyprusChill


Joined: 08/05/2009
Posts: 666

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 02:17

1944, even pre cold war years. 65 long years ago ruling... at a time when europe was entrenched in desperate war time measure, supported by the sense nations, aghaste and disgusted by the dictatorship at the time.

2009 Time to move on.

CyprusChill


Joined: 08/05/2009
Posts: 666

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 02:57

I reckon Stavros Flatley and son .. have a good angle on this one.

Rogerdodger


Joined: 24/04/2008
Posts: 271

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 09:06

This will go on for years yet, even if CTA wins it's case, the Greek lawers will appeal, the it goes to the high court, after that the the european court, ect, ect, there will not be direct flights for many years yet



RD

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 09:50

yes rodge, sure you are right...



there is value to this application because it offers a platform

to expose all the discrimination engineered by the other side



while changing absolutely nothing on the ground as it were,

it involves the promotion of an "arguable" point of view



just like the...er... orams saga

raybo


Joined: 06/08/2007
Posts: 175

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 12:47

Hi all,

The gc want turkey to lift the ban on them using famagusta port plus allow them to use thier air space yet they wont allow the direct flights or lifting of the embargos on trade,how about a bit of give and take boys!!!!

ray.

zcacmxi


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 388

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 12:57

raybo: "give" in the context that you specify does not appear to be in GC vocabulary.



The only thing they want to GIVE is the elbow to the British and Turkish. Then they have it all to themselves, which is what they've wanted all along!

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 13:06

Msg. 11

That is the interpretation of the Chicago Convention but not necessarily correct. For an alternative view please read what I wrote on the lunatics forum in December 2006 http://69.16.253.89/cyprus8484-20.html



ismet

AndyR



Joined: 23/04/2009
Posts: 317

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 13:17

msg5 -why would greece want to get involved?



Money. If it's made easier to have a holiday in TRNC then many people may go there in preference to ROC. TRNC's income from tourism increases and the ROC's decreases. Less Brits are holidaying abroad as of this year because of the economic climate so there's a potential huge loss of revenue to the ROC.



As far as I can see, it's only fair that both communities get an equal crack of the tourism whip. People will then choose based on the quality of the experience they get when on holiday. To that end, direct flights to TRNC should be allowed.

greylag


Joined: 08/04/2009
Posts: 1110

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 13:32

Andy,

Hear hear just wish that it was that easy,

G.

AndyR



Joined: 23/04/2009
Posts: 317

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 14:42

Greylag - So do I !

greylag


Joined: 08/04/2009
Posts: 1110

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 20:33

Arbee,

Would never do that matey everyone is entitled to their opinion on here i enjoy reading your posts.Saying that though it doesnt mean that i have to agree with them.Enjoy your evening,

G.

zcacmxi


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 388

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 22:55

arbee / elko / anybody



Please explain how Chicago Convention permits direct flights to Taiwan, which is an unrecognised state.



Or, will the result of this CTA case be to stop direct flights to other unrecognised states like Taiwan?



The Peoples Republic of China (China) claims that it "owns" the teritory of the Republic of China (Taiwan). Other countries don't officially recognise Taiwan so they don't upset China.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
27/05/2009 23:29

Arbee,

I see your point but my contention is that the intention behind the string of words "sovereignty, suzerainty, protection or mandate of such State" clearly implies that permission must be obtained from whoever has the effective control of the area. The whole object of the convention was to guarantee the security/safety of international flights. There is no doubt that according to UN, ROC has the Sovereignty over the north. Now suppose ROC gives permission for direct flights to Ercan and suppose Turkey (who has the physical control over the north) objects. Would it be safe or thinkable to allow such flights in the circumstances. Obviously not. So the object of the strings of words quoted above was to define the "physical control" of the place. The Chicago Convention has the sole object of Safety and not politics. Taiwan is a good precedence and legal arguments always revolve around precedences. If they do not allow direct flights to Ercan, they will have great difficulty to explain the situation of Taiwan.

The British government knows all this but did not want to take a seemingly political decision (for fear of the future of British Bases) and preferred to let the courts decide. So I am very hopeful.

ismet

zcacmxi


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 388

Message Posted:
28/05/2009 00:22

Laws & rules are made, but then they are enforced when it suits them.



Look at all the rules regarding EU membership that were waived to permit many of the members membership, but when it comes to Turkey they are strictly enforced.



Like the TRNC, Taiwan is unrecognised. However unlike TRNC, the world turns a blind eye and treats Taiwan like any other recognised state, which allows them direct flights, economic growth, etc.



Just like the Turkish Cypriots were the victims pre-74, but the world decided to continue recognising ROC and leave TCs in cold, just like ROC was rewarded with EU membership post Annan but TCs were left out in the cold.



Like you I strongly believe our case is sound. But looking at past decisions I believe there is every chance that EU/Britain will find another technicality to deny Turkish Cypriots any rights.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
28/05/2009 00:52

Arbee,

The link you provided above goes up to 51 pages only, so I could not find page 94. As for the history of Taiwan (formally known as Formosa), I am not aware of any facts relevant to the ongoing argument wrt direct flights. Could you please enlighten us on this matter?

ismet

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
28/05/2009 01:51

arbee,



sometimes you almost sound as if you don't want there to be direct flights to north cyprus



I wonder why?

CyprusChill


Joined: 08/05/2009
Posts: 666

Message Posted:
28/05/2009 02:02

A ruling of 66 years ago. Time to change the rule.

Turkey has very much become an emerged country and one that is visited and enjoyed by many nationalities.

Expansion to include its service to TRNC, has to be recognised.

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
28/05/2009 02:12

I know that taiwan is not officially recognised, but accepted and welcomed nearly everywhere

on the other hand the chinese parliament has voted to take back taiwan (as it were)

but commentators say china still lacks sufficient landing craft and amphibious capabilty (for now)

so on balance, a property purchase in north cyprus would seem a far safer bet in the long term

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
28/05/2009 11:26

arbee,

Taiwan was the recognized country for many years and indeed they had a permanent seat in the Security Council. Then suddenly it dawned on US and other countries that the mainland China was the real China and they changed sides overnight. Mainland China refused to have diplomatic links with any country that recognized Taiwan. So Taiwan is not a recognized country and presumably is not a member of the international aviation authority. The link I tried went only up to page 51 and it did say "End" at the end in various languages. So don't know what happened. Anyway I will keep trying the links you kindly provided because I am mainly interested in facts rather than a point scoring exercise.

I have sensed an air of agitation in your posts about the possibility of Ercan being opened to international flights. Whatever will be will be, worrying about it makes no differrence to the end result.

Thank you.

ismet

zcacmxi


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 388

Message Posted:
28/05/2009 11:26

Arbee: message 35. The list of member countries on the ICAO list that you posted http://www.icao.int/cgi/goto_m.pl?cgi/statesDB4.pl?en You stated: "Unless you’re a member you cannot fly to/from non-member ports. "



That list of members does not include Taiwan. Clealy the rules have been interpreted by the UK to allow direct flights to Taiwan, but not the TRNC for another reason. As neither are on that list.



In addition, the ECHR ruled that Turkey is responsible for the state of affairs in North Cyprus, the area not in the control of the ROC. Therefore, cleary if Turkey says Ercan & Gecitkale are open ports to air traffic then they are open.



Ercan airport is registered with IATA with code: ECN and also registered with ICAO with code: LCEN

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
28/05/2009 14:42

arbee reply to msg 38:



to holiday in beautiful north cyprus,

a shorter and more fuel-efficient flight would be a welcome bonus



I am fully aware that there are two sides to every story however

for example on a south cyprus forum, I came across a conversation along these lines:



#1

"my mate went to north cyprus,

fantastic weather, nice people and prices very reasonable

I told him buying such a package is illegal"



#2

"not only is the package illegal but the airline is illegal,

your taxi and car rental is illegal, the hotel is illegal

sunbathing on the beach is illegal, going on excursions is illegal,

eating in a retaurant and buying anything there is also illegal...

oh and promoting the holiday trip to anyone is illegal"



so now we know

greylag


Joined: 08/04/2009
Posts: 1110

Message Posted:
28/05/2009 17:32

Good old dark siders eh,bless em for they know no different,

G.

andre 514


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 1163

Message Posted:
28/05/2009 22:36

yes steve,



I'd just feel happier knowing whether eating a trnc ice cream,

watching hatchling turtles sprint to the sea at ayios philon

or even climbing the mount at the end of the karpaz is all illegal



one thing is for sure,

north cyprus lamb kebabs may or may not be legal,

but the gorgeous flavour is absolutely criminal

AlsancakJack



Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 5762

Message Posted:
28/05/2009 22:39

Nice one Andre.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
04/06/2009 17:27

re msg 10



>>With so many British Citizens disadvantaged and inconvenienced by this discriminatory decision, I am apalled that they are defending this case, at yet more cost to the British tax payer. <<



I'm "confused" ... I'm quite sure there are many more UK tax paying GCs than TCs or folk wishing to visit "TRNC" in the UK ... I'm pretty sure they'd prefer Tymbou (Ercan) to stay "off limits" while THEY can't exercise their right to move / work / live freely on the island ....



I think you need to find a new "line of attack" for your case... this one just fell flat on it's face..

zcacmxi


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 388

Message Posted:
04/06/2009 19:08

The UK allowing direct flights to ERCAN (ECN) will provide benefit to many British citizens, but not take anything away from any other British Citizens.



I'd understand the GCs would have a problem if they could only allow direct flights to 1 airport in Cyprus, and deciding on ECN will take away from larnaca.



As it stands, why keep those happy whose sole aim is to oppress a minority?



In addition, what is the justification for permitting direct flights to Taiwan but not North Cyprus when both are unrecognised states.

andy-f


Joined: 03/05/2009
Posts: 1256

Message Posted:
04/06/2009 20:33

its only a matter of time before direct flights start, they cant stop this once a solution to the cyprus problem is found one way or the other. the powers that be in the south will and are doing everything to stop,delay and inder this enevitable outcome. ercan (ECN) does not exist linda orams was told at court in south nicosia when asked how she entered cyprus by a member of the team trying to get the greek guys land back!sorry ive just flown pegasus from stanstead to ercan and they stuck white and green bagage ID stickers all over my cases with big letters ECN ? ercan exists and these airlines that fly to it recognise it, any bets how long it will take the likes of monarch to start flying to it when everyone wants to go on holliday to places not in the dreaded euro and not to far away?

dodger



Joined: 29/07/2007
Posts: 1895

Message Posted:
04/06/2009 21:09

At last an optimistic view to the situation.Well said Andy,

Paul.

waddo


Joined: 29/11/2008
Posts: 1966

Message Posted:
04/06/2009 21:15

As king of the stupid ideas - how about a case for recognition of Ercan and allow direct flights based upon ecological issues?



Shorter flight times means less fuel burnt means less carbon emissions means less greenhouse gas means cooler earth means less water use means everyone makes on the deal and the EU is a happy bunny if it thought of it!!!



OK, I will drift back off to sleep again, sorry for the disturbance.........



P.S.

Saw a dog in the back of a Southern Hire car yesterday, how come the South can bring dog's across the border and take them back?

natalie


Joined: 03/05/2009
Posts: 323

Message Posted:
04/06/2009 21:17

Hear hear Andy, we must not give up hope and I believe big changes are on the way. LOL

Aussie


Joined: 17/06/2007
Posts: 657

Message Posted:
05/06/2009 11:32

Out of curiosity does anyone know why such a case hasn't been brought before given the length of time the direct flight ban has persisted ?



I guess I was wondering if the solution to this could be that simple why wasn't it done before or is the reality that the case is a long shot, or designed just to continue to draw public attention to the matter ?



Aussie

clarets



Joined: 08/01/2009
Posts: 752

Message Posted:
05/06/2009 11:46

Arbee Msg 30....Taiwan is TOTALLY relevant. You appear to be ignoring certain very imprortant analogies between the two parallel situations.

clarets



Joined: 08/01/2009
Posts: 752

Message Posted:
05/06/2009 12:03

Msg 41, my missus got pregnant in TRNC....does that mean that Ben is illegal?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
05/06/2009 19:07

Just a thought...



Did anyone ever think that "Direct flights" might actually NOT be wanted by the airlines and many locals ?



There are many flights to TR that *might* disaappear...



I , for one used the routes to mainland TR - that went on to UK, etc. - only going to and from TR.



Do members think having direct flights would increase tourism / home ownership in "TRNC"?

clarets



Joined: 08/01/2009
Posts: 752

Message Posted:
05/06/2009 19:18

Hi Mark,I think most feel that it would just be more convenient....not having to touch down in Turkey. Certainly there would be more choice/competition with lifting of restrictions. Whether all that is good for the area is open to debate!

dodger



Joined: 29/07/2007
Posts: 1895

Message Posted:
05/06/2009 20:25

Direct has to be the way forward it makes economic sense in my humble opinion,

Paul.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
05/06/2009 22:43

Hi Iain!



re msg 53



Ben is "legally invalid" ;)



BTW Congrats on your team being back in the top flight ... I guess I'm going to have to wait for at least a year to see a Burnley-Leeds match that matters !



Keep checking the hot tub for writs ;)

ROBIN HOOD


Joined: 26/05/2008
Posts: 238

Message Posted:
07/06/2009 12:21

Direct Flights to Gaza and West Bank next?

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
07/06/2009 13:01

Direct flights to TRNC would without doubt help to aleviate the disadvantage that the region currently experiences.



As a holiday region the TRNC is second to no other mediteranean region. It is currently poorley marketed, difficult to get to and is clearly disadvantaged generally compared to other destinations.



Direct flights would provide a much stronger foundation for holiday and travel firms to market the area and its attractions.

Direct flights would certainly be a very valuable card for the TRNC administration in settlement negotiations.



TRNC is currently under seige, primarily by the ROC who currently have a strong hand and with recent litigation developments appaers even stronger.



I do hope that the Courts will find in favour of direct flights and that the TRNC can move forward.

dodger



Joined: 29/07/2007
Posts: 1895

Message Posted:
07/06/2009 19:27

WAZ,

Totally agree mate time to move on and open up the island,god knows it needs the extra money that would be created through tourism,

Paul.

Hector


Joined: 26/08/2008
Posts: 2352

Message Posted:
07/06/2009 19:49

I think mmmmmm could be right. Whenever I fly into Ercan from the UK, there is a lot of getting on & off when we stop in Turkey. Would it be financially viable for a direct flight until the numbers of passengers rise?



I'm wondering when the ROC will come up with another cunning legal plan to use the ECJ to somehow declare flights into the North unlawful.

dodger



Joined: 29/07/2007
Posts: 1895

Message Posted:
07/06/2009 19:55

http://essentialcyprus.com/direct-flights-north-cyprus/



Just found this article,

Paul.

girne 29


Joined: 06/12/2007
Posts: 1488

Message Posted:
07/06/2009 22:39

Take away the political considerations.

For us going to and from N.Ireland and Scotland. the extra hour or so that not flying direct involves,is as nothing compared to the extra 6-8 hours it takes us to fly via London.Add to that the extra £100-£120 per flight.



CTA cancelling the flights from these countries,rather than the indirect flights is the cause of nil tourism from those places .



edinburgh/glas toN.Cyprus about 12 hrs

Dom republic 10hrs

Florida under 9 hrs

Calgary 8hrs

Hurghada egypt under 6 hrs

Dubai about 7 hrs

andy-f


Joined: 03/05/2009
Posts: 1256

Message Posted:
07/06/2009 23:52

as i said in earlier post direct flights will happen but a lot of water will have to flow under the bridge first. i reckon at least two years (hope im wrong) talat and christofias must have all ready touched on this but its not been mentioned in any reports on the talks. the GCs will try every trick in the book to delay this happening, they are allready panicking about falling tourist numbers, can you see them standing for holliday makers deserting the south in favour of the north . . no way

dodger



Joined: 29/07/2007
Posts: 1895

Message Posted:
10/07/2009 17:55

Anyone have any news on the court case re-direct flights,

Paul.

Woodspeckie


Joined: 25/01/2009
Posts: 2263

Message Posted:
10/07/2009 21:47

Do you really think this UK government is interested in direct flights to Ercan? nothing in it for them so I don't think there is any interest, it's the least of their worries, too busy trying to get more money out of us taking holidays abroad not as many people applying for passports so they put up the price by £5.50 why don't they sack some of the staff is there isn't enough work for them, they could save money that way.