Orams..lessons learned

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
20/12/2008 03:28

Having reviewed the analysis by Ms Kokott Advocate General and Advisor to the the European Courts.



It would appear that the District Court of Nicosia made judgment against the Orams which has led to their severe difficulties. (I offer them my full sympathy)



However, what is most important. The judgment made, as Ms Kokott confirms ,was made as a default judgment.

Through no direct fault of their own the Orams failed to appear at the hearing and failed to make representations and consequently failed to make an appeal against that judgment.

Ms Kokott's hands are tied somewhat because the default judgment is indeed proper and correct in law.



Also important is that this case cannot be taken as a precident. The judgment in favour of the plaintiff was as a result of default by the Orams. The case failed to hear evidence from the Orams.

It is the case that if the Orams had made appeal against the judgment, on the grounds that the ROC Court had a vested interest ...cont

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
20/12/2008 03:36

in the outcome and is prujudicial to the ROC applicant. Then the outcome may have been ery very different.



It is my view that any litigation arising from property issues in Cyprus cannot be placed before any Cypriot Court because of the clear prejudice of the Courts on the Island.



What is the lesson to be learnt?

Be prepared and keep abrest of any changes that effect property law and protocol. This is a difficult time for anyone with property or investments in Cyprus. The current talks still offer hope for a solution.

PIPIE


Joined: 05/01/2008
Posts: 5499

Message Posted:
20/12/2008 09:09

well said message 2

Aussie


Joined: 17/06/2007
Posts: 657

Message Posted:
20/12/2008 10:14

Waz



I agree broadly with what you say.



In practice if the Orams had defended the original case in the ROC its hard to see that this would have changed the decision as it's almost inevitable they would always back the original GC owners case.



Their problems really started when (through no fault of their own) they were served the original court documents, as if they weren't able to be served they couldn't have proceeded in the ROC courts. Unfortunately its probably possible to serve documents in the UK or EU zone if they want to go to enough trouble but the TRNC has now made this an offence and risky for anyone trying to do so.



Presumably if the final decision goes aganst the Orams they would try to appeal to the European Courts and hope they would accept the case. If they did so the matter would be dragged out yet again possibly for years leaving eveyone in the TRNC in limbo yet again.



You can only hope some form of reunification agreement can be reached to solve it.

fire starter


Joined: 19/06/2008
Posts: 3401

Message Posted:
20/12/2008 11:16

the orams case was heard under the roc courts laws.

the orams failed to defend the case with reasonable argument and then by not turning up.

the roc is part of the e.u hence any judgement they make can be be upheld in another e.u court .

lets hope for everyones sake there is a solution very soon.

i understand there is also to be a general election here in the north next year, maybe this will change things?

Aussie


Joined: 17/06/2007
Posts: 657

Message Posted:
20/12/2008 15:36

I noticed in the article on this in Cyprus today said the Orams could appeal to the House of Lords if the ECJ decision ultimately goes against them.



Aussie

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
20/12/2008 16:26

Clearly any application by ROC citizen to an ROC Court that pertains to property held in TRNC which is alleged to be occupied territory is less than likely to get a fair and un-biased hearing.



If the ECJ consider that current TRNC comes under the lagal domain of ROC and EU,then anyone with property in TRNC can make application to an EU Court (say in UK) to have title to land verified, relinquished, et al.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 09:22

Simple perspective:



1/ The Orams were judged by a RoC court to be illegally occupying a displaced Cypriots property and living on a house build illegally on it. The Orams waved their "deeds" in Court and learnt that "TRNC" ain't a country in the REAL world.



2/ The GC owner went to the Court in England to get the judgement enforced - the validity of judgement wasn't questioned - whether in could be ENFORCED in another EU country's Courts was.. The UK Court ruled NO.. This is what the Orams and other misguided or biased folk called a "victory" - it was appealed



3/ UK High court asked the European Court of Justice to rule...their advisor has said the RoC Court ""has jurisdiction in relation to the property dispute, irrespective of the fact that the Republic of Cyprus does not exercise effective control over Northern Cyprus".

Her opinion is not binding on the European court's judges, but in most cases they follow her recommendations.



Fail to see how EU / RoC second home owners

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 09:23

Sorry if above msg seem abrupt.. 'twas trying to fit in content !

Harold2555



Joined: 19/04/2008
Posts: 1139

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 09:50

Marky



The problem is that by their very membership of the EU the Cypriot courts are deemed to be valid and their judgements free from bias. Those who believe otherwise will not have a hope in hell of getting a ruling to that effect even if they could show it in the UK courts or ECJ. Their only hope would then be an appeal to the ECHR after exhausting all appeal procedures in Cyprus.



This is a natural consequence of the entry of the ROC into the EU and the compromise reached in Protocol 10 of the accession treaty.



The declaration of the TRNC as a self ruling republc contributes to the situation.

If TRNC was a territory occupied by Turkey then the legal position would be different I suspect and the only resolution for GCs dispossed would be the ECHR which rules against Turkey not individuals.



In fact there is an interesting conflict behind the approaches of the ECHR and the advice being offered to the ECJ in this case.



Paul

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 10:04

Hi Paul



The declaration of UDI pf the "area of CY under TR control" makes no difference.. neither the EU nor the ECHR recognise "TRNC" as a government...



The ECHR clearly state TR is the main arbitrator of power.



The ECHR also state that the deeds as of 1974 - records of the RoC land Registry are the ones used as a basis to decide who still owns property.



The UK Judge and ECJ advisor have made it CLEAR that they did not dispute the findings of the RoC Nicosia Court.



Whether you like it , or not... the EU / ECJ accept that this case's legal findings aren't questionable... how to enforce it in a third party EU country were.. but won't be for much longer...



The RoC was REAL smart in not allowing displaced folks' properties to be sold for private gain.. any of those that HAVE should be used to embarrass the RoC.



The Orams case mainly only affects the second home market, if the "owner" has assets in the EU.

frontalman



Joined: 28/02/2008
Posts: 499

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 10:58

The fat lady has not yet sung, let's wait and see what develops. I am concerned for friends who only holiday here but I've a feelig this isn't as done and dusted as MarkyMark seems to think.

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 11:31

Mr Apostolides who is the GC applicant in the case is clearly intent upon revenge against the TRNC.

He is employed by the ROC Tourist Board and I suspect that there is Government finance behind his litigation.

The said piece of land which is some 300 sq metres was home to some lemon trees.

It is very unlikely indeed that be will take no benefit from this land should Orams Villa be demolished as he wishes.



The Property Comission set up by Turkey in TRNC could very realisticly have provided Mr Apostolides with compensation for his discomfort. Why did he not purseue this route rather than the underhanded and dispicable manner that he approached the Orams, served the writ, and seeks to threaten the complete peace process.



This man should be marked as a blight upon the current talks.

My own view is that he deserves nothing, but to be marked, as a perpertrator of nationalistic hatred and revenge.

I do hope,he fully understands, the devastating impact that his action could have

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 11:33

....cont



upon ALL Cyprioys, the welfare of the Island and its future.



Shame on you MR Apostolides

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 12:15

Dear Waz re 13/14



As you probably know the GC you refer to took out the case BEFORE the ECHR gave Turkey one last chance with the local remedy solution.. note TURKEY.. they don't recognise "TRNC"..



You might also have read in the press that the GC was moaning that the govt. wouldn't help him...



Now you may be right and and he *is* receiving support... but can you prove it ?



It doesn't matter how big / small the land is - the OWNER has the right to decide whether to build houses on his / her land



For YEARS Turkey has ignored ECHR judgements re HR and Property. Why do *you* think the crossings were opened in 2003 ?



Sadly, in Cyprus things only happen when TR or RoC are threatened with big costly "headaches".



YES. it would be better to see political progress, but it only seems to come with the sticks and carrots.



Sorry, but those that buy disputed land are the ones that should feel ashamed. This case, if nothing else, highlights that the Cyprus Problem is no-whe

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 12:22

re 12



Mark re this case:



Would you like to place a wager re the outcome of this case? We can even make it in GBP ;)



I have ALWAYS said this would swing on the interpretation of Protocol 10.. and that the UK Court would have to kick it to the ECJ and how they would rule...



I don't know if the AG of the ECJ is fat or if she sings, but her recommendations have NEVER previously been ignored..



We will know soon enough.. how about £10 GBP..?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 12:23

re 15



no-where near resolved.. particularly with regards to property. ( ran out of space !)

hattikins


Joined: 17/02/2008
Posts: 2793

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 12:24

I bought exchange land, not disputed land, and am not ashamed of that. If any GC wishes to have the land back then they will have to deal with the Turkish government who accepted the taxes I paid, or the vendors who sold it. I will not be getting in a panic over this and the gloom and doom merchants can just get on with it.

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2334

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 12:32

Waz: "What is the lesson to be learnt?"



The lessons to be learned by anyone who did what the Oramses did have to be:



1. Don't buy property that belongs to someone else.



2. Let your conscience be your guide, not greed.



3. Heed the warnings of your own government.



4. When you get caught don't start whining about it.

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 12:33

Mark,

Your comments are noted,

Clearly you appear to take the moral high ground regarding title of TRNC land.



Mr Apostolides, and indeed yourself should look long and hard at the potentail decline in your Cypriot status, asspirations and worth.



Mr Apostolides is clearly looking for nationalistic victory with little regard to the invevitable turmoil, and degeneration of Cypriot relations. He could easily be compensated and settle directly with the Orams.



Yourself, The ensuing turmoil and possible decline into anarchy as seen in pre 1974 will render your invesments ( if you have any) somewhat deminished. Your quality of Cypriot life may well fall to such a level that you may no longer wish to visit the region.



There will be no winners . The EU and UN must take the lead in current talks.

I firmly believe that a solution is possible and likely.

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2334

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 12:35

Aussie: "I noticed in the article on this in Cyprus today said the Orams could appeal to the House of Lords if the ECJ decision ultimately goes against them."



Waste of time. The ECJ is a higher authority than the Lords.

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 12:36

pp



Thank you again for your comments.

What are your thoughts regarding a solution?

It seems that most of your posts seem rather negative and not conjusive to moving the Cyprus problem towards a solution.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 12:37

Dear Hattikns



That's EXACTLY what the Orams tried to tell the RoC Court..



The displaced GC did not exchange *his* land.. it is STILL theirs...



This is not "propaganda" it is the ruling of the ECHR of which TR is a member and agrees to play by the rules...



You don't need to panic, unless you got assets in an EU country... If you've sold up and live in "the area of CY under TR control" you are safe as this action can't "hurt" you..



But.. you'll knew all that really....;)

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 12:41

Msg 21 pp

Your are correct in this statement,

However the Orams will have a right of appeal to ECHR an ECJ



I do hope that matters do not need to go thatb far over a bit of land of 300 m2



Mr Apostolides should settle out of Court and live and let live.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 12:53

re 20 Waz



1/ You keep mentioning "TRNC" title as if it carries some sort of legal status - it is land in Cyprus and until I read otherwise - the only internationally- legally officially recognised title issuer is the RoC



2/ I have no Cypriot status, other than ex Resident and my aspirations are that be it TC or GC, Cypriots get the choice of Restitution, followed by compo re their Property / land - and that the passage of time should have no influence...



Anarchy is the continued current surreal status of part of the island - with TCs not able to REALLY govern themselves and Cypriots being forbidden the same right as other EU / non -EU citizens to live where they please on the island.



I have already made it clear that I have no investments - other than people and friendships on the island , now.



The property issue is the MAIN stumbling point in the possible progress of any talks and ( again) the passage of time, must not stand in the way of the real owners re taking p

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 13:09

Waz,



re 21



"However the Orams will have a right of appeal to ECHR an ECJ "



Now that would be interesting.. but do bear in mind that the ECHR will agree that the Orams don't own the land..

WAZ-24-7



Joined: 18/10/2008
Posts: 695

Message Posted:
21/12/2008 17:59

Mark,

Thank you for your comments.

TRNC tiltle deeds exhist and are currently take precident in that Republic, all be it that the TRNC is not wideley accepted.



I am in agrement with your asspiration for restitution, within reason.

It is clear that GC + TC in their respectice enclaves are not likely to move back to their respective property.

Compsation seems the most likely solution to restitution.

I am right in taking the line that most ex-pats will consider this a suitable way forward as did Mr Anan in 2004.



I disagree with your comment about anarchy. There has been peace on the Island since the Turkish intervention. To condone and support mass civil litigation, regardless of EU Court rulings, would certainly lead to the return of the 1974 state of anarchy.

Property issues are not, in my view, the main stumbling block in talks. It is the nationalistic political asspirations.

For the sake of your friends and people on the island promote a solution rather than legal banter