Orams villa now TRNC's?

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 13:05

From Frank & Joans site:



"I received a phone call to tell me that the TRNC government had compulsory purchased the Orams villa. One can only assume that this means that as they now own it application will have to now be made to the Independent Property Commission to demolish. It has already been said that the government is to pay all the costs incurred.

Hopefully more information will come out on this soon."





Possibly many more twists to come!



Rob

ocean



Joined: 20/08/2009
Posts: 371

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 13:22

so what can this mean?

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 13:44

I don't think that the IPC can give planning permission for anything, including demolition.

mamachina


Joined: 22/11/2008
Posts: 730

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 13:47

Why doesnt the Government buy every villa for token payment of 1lire or something, and then lease them back to us in perpetuity?

Jovial_John


Joined: 31/01/2009
Posts: 1024

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 13:50

I should imagine that the Orams must go back to either:-

a) the South Cyprus court (whose original order was processed through Europe and the UK) and get a variance as they can no longer comply with the original order because they cannot demolish the villa as ordered. Presumably, as this would now be a different order, it will need to pursued through Europe and the UK again.

or b) the UK court for such a variance.

But the GCs must start again by taking the TRNC government to court in the South if they want the villa demolished and the land returned.

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 13:50

How would that help?

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 13:53

Checkmate!...

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 14:03

It may well just be a one off test case by the TRNC.



Any enforcement of judgements, (RoC, EU or UK) can now only be applied for against the TRNC, who I would imagine would direct any action to the IPC.



If this was set as a precedent, any further 'claims' may have to ackowledge the TRNC and the IPC as 'defendants', rather than individual 'owners'.



Rob ?

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 14:33

"Why doesnt the Government buy every villa for token payment of 1lire or something, and then lease them back to us in perpetuity?"

it's about trespass, it's about trespass, it's about trespass, it's about trespass, it's about trespass, it's about trespass

clayton


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 1143

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 14:39

malsancak

whats it about he he.

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 14:47

To complete the story, now I expect the government to give them another villa of original Turkish title to compensate for their villa but probably they will await until Orams report back to UK appeal court. Its part of the cat and mouse game.

ismet

Jovial_John


Joined: 31/01/2009
Posts: 1024

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 14:57

But it was 'trespass on the land' (by building a villa there) that caused the court to order demolition of the villa and presumably a good portion of the damages were for this trespass as was the order for restitution of the land to its former state. If the Orams hadn't (and now don't) own the villa they cannot be ordered to demolish it.

I wonder if it would then be worthwhile to sue for ordinary trespass for living in a rented (or leased) villa; surely the case would still be against the owner of the villa for permitting the trespass. I don't know the law here but in the UK there is no crime of trespass per se - It's only actionable if you trespass and cause damage.

Molly


Joined: 30/08/2008
Posts: 299

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 15:01

The Greeks have amended/introduced laws to suit their purpose!

scruff


Joined: 15/07/2008
Posts: 1070

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 15:10

Why oh why do people have to keep using the words "The Greeks". This not only winds MM up, but does the same to me.

The Greeks are not involved in this. The people who predominately inhabit the ROC are Cypriots & commonly known as Greek Cypriots.

Birdsong


Joined: 14/05/2009
Posts: 43

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 15:57

How does he always know everything?

Well, he doesn't always, despite what he says.

It would be best if everyone just waited patiently to see what happens instead of hanging onto his every word.

elkiton



Joined: 15/03/2009
Posts: 514

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 17:33

Message 15, that is a pretty unpleasant term of address to use towards anybody,wether you have regard for them or not.

Somebody delete the post please as this is a personal insult.

TonyE

Birdsong


Joined: 14/05/2009
Posts: 43

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 17:43

I agree, but that's what he's known as locally around a lot of the bars in Lapta because he irritates so many people.

Those who put their heads above the parapet...........

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 17:48

I can confirm that is what they are known as. I have even less respect for them for reasons I won't go into on a public BB.

tattlad


Joined: 13/12/2008
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 18:06

Well that'll be the end of that for Apostleidis, he's got no chance of getting the land back now ha ha ha ha, serves him right.

the butler


Joined: 22/06/2007
Posts: 1958

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 18:07

I must be missing something here. I have read through these posts 3 times and do not follow who you are talking about and who is known as what around the bars in Lapta. Maybe because I do not frequent the bars in Lapta, I am not in the know but please do not go on a public forum and tell only half a tale.



The butlers wife

hattikins


Joined: 17/02/2008
Posts: 2793

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 18:19

Are we going to sink as low as the GC forum by name calling, the person in question posted some information, believe it or not according to your own view but don't make things personal.

If true it's certainly an interesting move to be considered.

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11281

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 18:30

RE msg 14, scruffs: (...) commonly known as Greek Cypriots (...)

=> Just a pedantic remark, if permitted? The ancestors of the people in the South, here often referred to as "Greek Cypriots", were once probably Greek speaking settlers from the Aechaen islands. The claim to be a "Greek Cypriot" is not right and misleading imo. At best we should call them "Greek speaking Cypriots". The Aechaen islands didn't belong to Greece, because Greece didn't exist.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 18:36

re msg 14..



;)



It 'winds me up ' as it isn't the correct terminology and ( more importantly) there still are some Greek Cypriots who want to be referred to as 'Greeks' and *I* don't want to 'encourage' 'em..





As to this 'news' ... I'm not sure how this effects things ! If you remember the Orams' tried to use the "we have deeds supplied by 'TRNC' " as a 'defence'



This could be deemed as 'contempt of Court'...?!

basheer



Joined: 22/12/2008
Posts: 949

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 18:41

some of us use the villa for short visits as holiday, so the villa is empty so no one is tresspassing if its empty

and then if my daughter is approached when she's there for a couple of months, they will have to serve her notice and she is turkish cypriot/british.with no assets in the Uk .I have heard if you note their car number down they could be stopped at the border and charged for something

tattlad


Joined: 13/12/2008
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 18:46

I've been told by the locals that if a GC turns up on your property you should call the Police and take the car number, they will be arrested, held for a few days for questioning and generally hassled , or stooped at the border, then they will be banned from entering the TRNC again.

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11281

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 18:51

RE msg 23, 6xm: (...) It 'winds me up ' as it isn't the correct terminology (...)

=> You know what winds some here up? Your use of "TRNC" as it isn't the correct terminology. As a member of this board you either use TRNC (WITHOUT QUOTATION MARKS) or Occupied territory with or without quotation marks, if you don't acknowledge the TRNC and its right to exist. In the latter case you must be banned from this board - read http://www.cyprus44.com/forums/rules.asp (Rule 5).

girne 29


Joined: 06/12/2007
Posts: 1488

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 18:52

messages

16,17,18



Has there been part of this thread removed,cant see what the above posts are about.

Pipie


Joined: 05/01/2008
Posts: 5499

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 19:01

Going back to messege 1 if this is correct then i say well done to TRNC gov't it certainly must be a thumbs up for the Orams , it also means that the TRNC gov't have acted quickly in supporting the Orams .'' Brilliant news '' again I say well done TRNC gov't

Maz


Joined: 29/03/2009
Posts: 1924

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 19:07

Yes it is all going a bit haywire, but referring back to message no.1, from whom was the phone call received by Frank and Joan? The Orams? If not, then who, and how would this person know.



There are so many pieces of information floating around that it is VITAL that whatever is said is truth.



So, back to my first sentence - WHO phoned Frank and Joan?

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 19:21

Mark



"As to this 'news' ... I'm not sure how this effects things ! If you remember the Orams' tried to use the "we have deeds supplied by 'TRNC' " as a 'defence'



This could be deemed as 'contempt of Court'...?! "



Actually no!



The Orams have not sold their villa to avoid their legal obligations, they have been subject to a Compulsory Purchase Order by the TRNC.

They can not now be found to be in 'Contempt', they are more likely to be seen as being 'frustrated' in their attempts to comply with any order.





Hats off to the TRNC! They obviously are (for a change?), ahead of the game and forcing the Greeks (there! I've said it!) to recognise the TRNC and the IPC.



Rob

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 19:26

MarieB



Franks update:







In today's newspaper the TRNC government has said that the Greek Cypriot owner of the Orams villa must apply to the IPC if he wants his land back. Also they say that they are challenging the £1.5 million costs but are going to pay the compensation costs. This would seem to indicate that the phone call I received about compulsory purchase may well be right.





We don't know who phoned Frank & I dont know which newspaper Frank is referring to, but I personally think this is potentially good news.





Rob

Maz


Joined: 29/03/2009
Posts: 1924

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 19:27

I still want to know who phoned Frank and Joan, cos I bet it wasn't the Orams, but.......

message 30. It is interesting, isn't it, that if the south were to sue the TRNC, that shows recognition of the place, and the south don't want to do that. So, it is a very interesrting 'Catch 22' isn't it.

Pipie


Joined: 05/01/2008
Posts: 5499

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 19:40

MarieB would it be a good idea for you to Phone F/J to ask who phone them then let us know . cheers

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 19:43

They are Christians down there aren't they? Shouldn't they forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 19:57

Dear RobnJo re 30



Thanks for your well thought through response.. The original Court ruling is the RoC Court.. do you think they are going to accept a CPO any more than 'title deeds' ? !



Marie B re 32



The IPC has nought to do with 'TRNC' - it is Turkey's local remedy .. so no 'recognition' issues for the 'rump' RoC



Dearest Hans re 26



re rule 5 - I [ for the forth time] refer you to my VERY first thread on this forum .. it answers your Q.

Maz


Joined: 29/03/2009
Posts: 1924

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 20:09

Siorry guys if I missed any of the threads, but to sum up replies to above:



1. The idea of TRNC gov taking over was muted from day one, so nothing new in that.

2. The Orams cleared their stuff out to comply with the U.K court's ruling.

3. Not sure who the south will chase, IPC or TRNC or what, but that will involve a load more legal costs - lucky lawyers who will get nice big pay cheques.

4. It was stated a week ago that the Gov was querying the £1.5 million - no update on that.

5. Thanks for pointing out it was in a newspaper. I think alol the newspapers north and south are carrying the same stuff, but with maybe differing emphasise.

6. As to phoning F & J - don'[t know their number, and in any case an earlier response has answered the question - ta.

7. It is interesting to just watch and wait - lots of thinking seems to be going on so let;'s hope some of the right thinking produces right results.

Meanwhile, I think some stupid measures are happening. Ho hum.

millzer


Joined: 12/04/2007
Posts: 978

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 20:14

>"The original Court ruling is the RoC Court.. do you think they are going to accept a CPO any more than 'title deeds' ? !"<



if the ROC don't accept the CPO (which is pretty much a given) what can they do about it anyway as the ROC courts have no effective control. It'll be interesting to see what happens from here on in but it certainly seems to remove the Orams' themselves from the equation from now on.



I agree with message 30, I don't believe the UK court can hold the Orams' in contempt for something that is now no longer in their power to enforce i.e. demolition of the villa. The Orams have no more power than the ROC gov/courts to make the TRNC gov' comply with the judgement which really just makes a mockery of all the court hearings appeals etc etc as they are now back to square one and faced with what is effectively a political problem and not a legal one.

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 20:15

mark



the facts are that the ROC Court has no jurisiction in the TRNC. That is why they persued this test case to the highest level in the EU and UK purely because the Orams had UK assets.. The CPO has changed the whole process and brought the TRNC into the picture.



The ROC have already had to 'accept' and recognise the TRNC to allow the current talks. They are not talking to Turkey.



The IPC is the offered and often successful route for claims now offered by the TRNC.



Trying to pass off the IPC as 'Turkish' is as misleading as trying to pass off Christofias as a representative of the Greek Government.

Pipie


Joined: 05/01/2008
Posts: 5499

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 20:17

Marie B E-mail address/phone number is on F/J website would be good to get it from the horses mouth so to speak .

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 20:36

Dear RobnJo re 38



re : "Trying to pass off the IPC as 'Turkish' is as misleading as trying to pass off Christofias as a representative of the Greek Government."



If your think the IPC is 'TRNC's' local remedy - then I respectfully suggest you follow this link to the ECHR:



http://www.archive.org/details/ECHREuropeanCourtofHumanRights-TurkeyvsCyprus



We both know that we are discussing semantics ..

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 20:48

It suspect that Mr A and his legal team expect some action by the TRNC in order to counter their victory.

Mr A and the ROC clearly have a distinct and clear advantage against title holders in the TRNC.

Mr and Mrs Orams have clearly taken steps and actions to follow the judgment "to the letter"... a very prudent move.



Mr A must noe decide on what action he would like to take. He has won the political points and now well go to the IPC so that he can now add to his celebrations with a bag full of dollars.

I see no simple solution to full imlementation of the Order. The Orams need not apply for a reconsideration of the Order.

The ball is in Mr A's court. I suspect that he has gained the political points and legal precedent has been set. He will now go for compensation from IPC and claim for all he can get for ALL his property.

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 20:50

mark



I think you are confusing semantic with pedantic!



It doesn't matter how many existing 'rulings' or 'statements' anyone comes up with,... the CPO has changed the game.



The TRNC have possibly put themselves back in the driving seat.





As ismet said earlier, we are into a game of cat-n-mouse.





Rob

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 20:57

Hi Waz



re msg 41



I'm going to stick my neck out here and wager you that Mr A will not be approaching the IPC in the near future..



WHY?



Because legally, (outside of TR / 'TRNC' ) it is still his land.. I am guessing he doesn't want 'compo' ..he wants restitution.

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 20:59

m6, I read your link and it did not contradict that the IPC is a TRNC remedy and it also said,

"The court (EHCR) has to decide whether a so-called Immovable Properties Commission in the Turkish occupied 'north' of Cyprus constitutes an effective domestic remedy for applications by Greek Cypriots against Turkey. If it decides in favour of the property commission as an effective domestic remedy, then Greek Cypriots will no longer have direct recourse to the ECHR for their property claims but must pass through the commission in the north first."

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 21:20

Dear Malsancak re msg 44



"The court (EHCR) has to decide whether... constitutes.. domestic remedy by GCs against TURKEY.... "



I thought English was your mother tongue..



The actions are against TURKEY... simples.. said with Russian accent ;)

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 21:39

M6, "I thought English was your mother tongue.."

You have been picking up nasty habits on those other boards you frequent. I'll repeat what I wrote - "I read your link and it did not contradict that the IPC is a TRNC remedy." What you then implied in your last post was that a decision had been made and that the IPC WAS a Turkish and not a TRNC remedy, when in fact it quite clearly states that the ECHR has yet to decide

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 22:49

mmmmm

You may be right, you may not.

Consider... Mr A has achieved political points and a legal precedent.

If you are right and the villa is not to be demolished then he will of course continue his fight for restitution. How,I am not sure as civil litigation is no longer really viable.



Or as I have suggested he will now forgo restitution in return for finnancial gain above and beyond his clear political victory.

Hatty


Joined: 13/07/2008
Posts: 260

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 23:31

If the land belongs to Mr. A then surely he should be seeking permission to demolish the buildings on it,?

Hector


Joined: 26/08/2008
Posts: 2352

Message Posted:
04/02/2010 23:32

OK so lets take it that the TRNC have compulsory purchased the Orams villa. So who will live in it now I wonder? Answers on a postcard.. (please no mention of nepotism that doesn't really happen in the TRNC does it?)



Meanwhile does this set a precedent that the Government will buy every property built on 'exchange' land or when a civil action is started as per the Orams?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 01:05

Dear Malsancak



re msg 46





Q: Do you know how the IPC ( TURKEY's local remedy ) came about ?



A:Clearly not ... There are several thousand cases pending at the ECHR taken out by individuals against TURKEY ( not 'TRNC') re property..



The ECHR decided to allow TURKEY to provide a local remedy - for a trial period - the decision about it's workings during this trial period - and whether the IPC will be allowed to continue - will be announced in May '10



So, my 'rudeness' is as a result of what I perceive to be 'wilful stuidity' in the light of a very clear English link and many posts concerning the IPC in which you have participated.



This is not an opinion .. it is FACT..

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 09:33

If, indeed, there exists a CPO on the Orams' villa - is this not tantamount, on the part of the TRNC government, to admission that the property should not have been sold to the Orams in the first place?



Since the rest of the plots, on what is claimed by Mr. A to be 'his land', are (allegedly) populated by TC's, is it prudent for them to also demand CPO on 'their' properties?

tattlad


Joined: 13/12/2008
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 11:36

Msg 51.

ECHR is a European court, not Turkish, and if you hadn't noticed Turkey is not in Europe and can and will make their own laws and minds up, Europe can push and press all they like on what ever topics they want, but you will find Turkey will stand by their own decisions as they have done for centuries, and I think you will find that the EU and America want Turkey in Europe more than Turkey want to be in Europe, so we will see who ends up in the driving seat shall we.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 13:01

re msg 52



Tattlad



"ECHR is a European court, not Turkish, and if you hadn't noticed Turkey is not in Europe and can and will make their own laws and minds up"



The ECHR is the legal arm of the 'Council of Europe' - made up of 47 members -who agree to be bound by it's findings..



http://www.coe.int/aboutCoe/index.asp?page=47pays1europe&l=en



.. Turkey *is* a member of the club..



Hope that clears up any misunderstanding ...!

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 13:07

m6, could it be that the reason you say that the IPC is Turkish is because you personally do not recognise the TRNC? That's the personal difference between us. According to the international definition, because the TRNC is deemed illegal, you are right. Hope you are happy now.



Anyway, the TRNC's IPC will be the only financially sensible route for those wishing to regain the value of their lost assets and perhaps, in some cases the actual asset. Wouldn't it be cunning if the TRNC's IPC were to hint that there was a possibility that they would give back the Oram plot to Mr A if he were to use them to seek restitution.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 13:07

A little educational quiz for us..



I only got 5/ 10 right :(

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 13:24

How you view these developments depends on your personal situation.



If you own 'safe' title in NC you are not affected, but you may have many friends who are.



If you dont own any property anywhere in Cyprus, you can easily adopt the role of pontificating 'Barrack Room Lawyer' as you have no personal interest.



If you own Exchange property, you are very directly affected as to your home, your family, your finances and future life.



There are many thousands on Exchange property.



I think all of them would prefer any 'action', or remedy, to be taken through the TRNC and the IPC, rather than by any GC 'Legal' action and potentially action through EU and UK Courts as has happened to the Orams.





Before you post, just think,... does it affect me?







Rob

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 14:11

"If you own 'safe' title in NC you are not affected"

You would have to have had that title transferred to you pre-1974 because if not the title deeds are still officially in the name of the original owner. This is because the TRNC is not recognised as being able to transfer deeds into your name. Down south there are allegedly 9500 TC properties illegally transferred into the names of GCs

http://www.northcyprusfreepress.com/2010/01/23/greek-cypriots-have-already-issued-9500-title-deeds-for-tc-property/

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 14:15

re msg 54 Mal..



"m6, could it be that the reason you say that the IPC is Turkish is because you personally do not recognise the TRNC? "



nope.. I'm not'saying it ...the ECHR are... If 'TRNC' was a member of the CoE and the ECHR had ruled that it ['TRNC' ] had to provide the local remedy I wouldn't be repeating the obvious... ;)





"Anyway, the TRNC's IPC will be the only financially sensible route for those wishing to regain the value of their lost assets and perhaps, in some cases the actual asset. Wouldn't it be cunning if the TRNC's IPC were to hint that there was a possibility that they would give back the Oram plot to Mr A if he were to use them to seek restitution."



I think you are trying to say that Turkey should 'hint' Mr A should have gone down this route.. They already have.. When Mr A took legal action, the IPC didn't exist..



Not one GC has had occupied property returned... YET...

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 14:20

(cont)



*I* think GCs should be encouraged to use the IPC option - if only to see if the results are 'fair'... claiming it to be a 'TRNC' institution is the last thing needed to encourage a GC to incur the 'wrath' of his/her peers :(



Some TCs *have* had their occupied properties returned, but thoes that have resorted to legal action in the 'rump' RoC have no legal precedent - as the RoC invariably settles out of Court :(



Legal actions will drive both 'side's' towards a negotiate settlement...

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 14:21

mark



"Not one GC has had occupied property returned... YET... "





Probably because they do not wish to actually have their property returned. Many have already agreed terms with the IPC.

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 14:35

Malcolm



Are you saying that anyone who has bought 'pre74' title since 1974 is not on 'safe' title?



That would mean that no title whatsoever in NC is 'safe'.





Rob

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 14:39

Hi RobnJo..



"Probably because they do not wish to actually have their property returned"



Er no.. the GCs refused are specifically asking for restitution.



" Many have already agreed terms with the IPC."



True.. and it would be great if more GCs explored this option and the ECHR could - reliably - rule on it's merit .



Currently, RoC laws re their Trustee of TC property being the only body that rule on 'deals' conflicts with the ECHR ruling...So GCs are 'discouraged' [ that is putting it mildly ] from investigating this route...



Claiming the IPC is a 'TRNC' institution doesn't exactly 'help' :(

tattlad


Joined: 13/12/2008
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 15:07

Msg 53.

It will become very clear very soon which club Turkey is in................. You may get a surprise........

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 15:07

mark



The CPO by the TRNC may well mean they have to accept the TRNC and the IPC as the correct avenue.



I'm sure the ECHR, the EU and UK Courts would be more than happy if the IPC was such recognised.



It would take a lot of political pressure off them.



Any previous rulings would instantly go out of the window.





Rob

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 15:12

Mal...""If you own 'safe' title in NC you are not affected"



You would have to have had that title transferred to you pre-1974 because if not the title deeds are still officially in the name of the original owner"..........



..Unless of course the GC owner has been legitimately paid for the land.

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 15:47

"Are you saying that anyone who has bought 'pre74' title since 1974 is not on 'safe' title?"

In my OPINION - it is safe if the seller accepts that despite the deeds not being officially transferred the contract of sale stands

"..Unless of course the GC owner has been legitimately paid for the land."

In my OPINION - but, up until very very recently you might have paid the GC but the RoC Land Registry would probably not have processed the transfer because of the embargo on GCs selling their land.

ROBnJO


Joined: 30/06/2008
Posts: 1289

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 15:53

Or is Mal suggesting that even if you, since 74, bought Turkish or British pre 74 owned title, that as the TRNC is not 'recognised', any such transfer of title is not deemed as internationally legal and such title may not be 'safe'??

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 16:26

ROBnJO - yes!!!

Jovial_John


Joined: 31/01/2009
Posts: 1024

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 17:26

Also land was illegally transferred to GC ownership between 1963 and 1974. An original TC owner may well not be aware and sell his land in good faith. You can only be sure if you check the Land Registry in the South. If such an issue arises then it would be up to the original TC owner to fight the case on your behalf - but why would they bother? There is a huge discrepancy between the claims of the 2 sides as to how much land in the North was owned respectively by GCs and TCs prior to 1974.

There have been further recent cases of this in the South - only 18 months ago a local mayor was prosecuted for illegally transferring land to GC ownership and that land was sold to largely British ex-pats. How many more cases have not yet seen the light of day.

basheer



Joined: 22/12/2008
Posts: 949

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 20:02

I have exchange land and know the situation, my wife's first cousin ,Turkish Cyriot bought turkish land of a turk who bought the land of a british land owner,probably after 74 and built a house on it

Is he too in the same situation and if the Turk bought the land of a british land owner before 74 would that make the difference

the reason being he kept warning me about exchange issues and that he was safe be glad of some answers

Reproman


Joined: 05/06/2008
Posts: 252

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 20:17

So the only Recognized Land Registry office is in the ROC regarding the legality of title deeds both north and south cyprus.



And we are all to believe that none of these have been tampered with since 1974?

Or even Pre 1974 when the Greeks were actually trying to wipe Turkish Cypriots off the face of this earth, and they have been entrusted with holding 'safe and secure, in their Greek hands any traces of original Turkish title deeds?



YEAH RIGHT!



Just like how Greece didnt fiddle with there financial books just to get into the EU...now look at the mess they are in!

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 20:39

basheer, there are two issues: deeds recognised internationally and those only recognised in Turkey and the TRNC. Personally, as long as you have TRNC issued deeds and have no assets in the EU then in general currently there are no particular problems as far as GCs are concerned. Internationally, all deeds issued in the TRNC from 1974 onwards are not recognised as being valid.

LivingNC



Joined: 15/07/2009
Posts: 34

Message Posted:
05/02/2010 22:14

'the greeks' is a term used globally and refers to the greek community wether it be greek from athens, greek cypriot, greek gods, american greeks and anyone else whom class themselves to be of greek origin...



dont understand how this could be politically incorrect...

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
06/02/2010 01:52

re 73

Well I have already given you a clue in msg 23.. but here's another one



The REAL Greeks.. from Greece... will tell you that the Cypriots are 'Arabs that wear shoes' .. Greek speaking Cypriots speak a dialect of Greek, and the accent is completely different and ridiculed by Greeks ..



GCs have more in common, genetically, with TCs than with mainland Greeks .



As Hans, says.. Greece didn't exist when the first Hellenic settlers arrived on the island..

Brinsley


Joined: 04/04/2009
Posts: 6858

Message Posted:
06/02/2010 07:57

DNA them all!



Richard

Tenakoutou



Joined: 27/07/2009
Posts: 4110

Message Posted:
06/02/2010 10:00

How can the *'International Community' be so naive as to be sucked into believing that title deeds on both sides haven't been 'fabricated', changed or tampered with?



So, for verification purposes, for *them to only trust and entrust the validity of all of the island's title deeds to the RoC Land Registry is simply absurd!



Have they completely forgotten who *they are dealing with, never mind the massive frauds currently being committed against both foreigners and their own people, in total defiance of the EU?

basheer



Joined: 22/12/2008
Posts: 949

Message Posted:
06/02/2010 12:09

Hi malsancak, last oct i transfered our joint name title deeds to my wife only in order to benifit from the transfer tax discount ,and since our permission to purchase was not ready, and my wife with her kimlit card which was a job and a half to obtain we met the dead line and saved alot of money

my daughter too has her kimlit card and spends most of her time in lapta in the summer they both are british born and my wife's parents (turkish cypriots)were born in larnaca so based on that the kimlit cards was given, the property in the Uk is in my name only and own nothing now in north cyprus

I presume if issues were to arise it would be more difficult to lay claim of trespass in lapta nice to hear your opinion,bear in mind the villa is closed most of winter and used by my daughter in the summer my wife and myself tend to make several short visits in the summer, a visit by a south cypriot and making contact is very unlikly,if ever it be my daughter they would likely meet thanks

MarkVPiazza


Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 530

Message Posted:
06/02/2010 12:32

ref message 74



mmmm is correct, most GCs are semitic in origin, i.e far more in common with Arabs and Jews that Greeks.



Look how far Cyprus is from Greece, and how near it is to Turkey and Syria, so where do you think most Cypriots originated from?





The mass importation of mainland Greeks during Makarios's time was probably the largest ever influx of Greek blood into Cyprus.



Mark

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
06/02/2010 13:14

Hi Mark



re msg 78





"The mass importation of mainland Greeks during Makarios's time was probably the largest ever influx of Greek blood into Cyprus."



Tell us about this mass importation, please .. it's news to me.. :0

Maz


Joined: 29/03/2009
Posts: 1924

Message Posted:
06/02/2010 13:20

I thought the greatest influx was at the time of Alexander the Great!