Cyprus-Forum.com

[turkcyp]

no if she sued the trnc that would mean she recognizes them,something like allowing ships to sail into your ports

Not following the argument.

I said if she comes over to north and start living in north under its laws it means it idirectly recognizes it. She would be carrying TRNC deeds for her property after all. She would be paying TRNC property taxes after all.

Of course bear in mind that, these are all probable hypothetical scenarios. Not that anything happened yet, or she is given her property back or anything. I like thinking about hypothetical scenarios about the future. I guess Mikkie can atest to that.

A good day to you,

[turkcyp]

More information about the issue:

Emin v Yeldag Case: Involves recognition of TRNC court case decisions in UK.


Recognition of divorce in Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus

BFLS 5[551] 14

Emin v Yeldag (AG and Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs intervening) [2002] 1 FLR 956, FD

In Emin v Yeldag (AG and Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs intervening) [2002] 1 FLR 956, FD, Sumner J held that there was jurisdiction to recognise a divorce granted by a court in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). Although the British government did not recognise the TRNC and therefore its legal actions were normally to be regarded as ineffective, there was an exception covering legal resolution of private matters between citizens that were necessary to permit private life to continue to be properly regulated. Provided that the requirements of the Family Law Act 1986 were met, a divorce in the TRNC could be recognised.

Comment: This decision reflects the position taken by the European Court of Human Rights and reduces the impact of the continuing dispute over recognition on the lives of individual citizens. It takes the opposite view to that adopted by His Honour Judge Compston, sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court, in B v B (Divorce: Northern Cyprus [2000] 2 FLR 707. Although technically of equal precedential weight, the new decision is to be preferred as having benefited from detailed submissions on behalf of the Attorney General and the Foreign Secretary.

[boulio]

I said if she comes over to north and start living in north under its laws it means it idirectly recognizes it. She would be carrying TRNC deeds for her property after all. She would be paying TRNC property taxes after all.

how would she be carrying trnc deeds?did she go to court with trnc deeds?how can she pay taxes to the trnc when the roc is the legal govt of the whole island with EU laws suspended in the north?

[turkcyp]

how would she be carrying trnc deeds?did she go to court with trnc deeds?how can she pay taxes to the trnc when the roc is the legal govt of the whole island with EU laws suspended in the north?

Hey. All I am telling you hypothetical scenarios where North can try to satisfy the second part of the ECHR Louzidiou rulling. The rulling says that Turkey should give unlimited access, usage, and property righst to Louzidou. And one scenario is that TRNC says taht here you go "These are your deeds and come and use your property unlimited the way you wish".

Then if Louzidou does not like this. Then she will again take Turkey to ECHr saying she did not obey by the court rulling. At that point ECHR will have to decide again, if giving TRNC deeds to Louzidou satisfy its previous rulling of "unlimited property rights". (there are very probable chances that they may because human rights has something to do with you rights in practice not who provides those rights to you, TRNC, RoC or whatever. For example, the Brits that own the property in north before 1974, and continues to have access to those land in TRNC rule, will have no chance of suing Turkey and winning the court case, because their property rights are not distrupted in 1974. It does not matter that those property righst are provided and safeguarded by an entity which is illegal after 1974).

Again we are doing devil's advocate here, smile once in a while

[turkcyp]

More about the legal precedent how the legal system of an unrecignized country is recognized by Uk courts:

Hesperides Hotels Ltd and Another v Aegean Turkish Holidays Ltd and Another (1977):

The Appeals court decided that there is an effective local goverment and legal system in north, and accepted de-facto partition of the island (not de-jure though)
“(t)here is an effective administration in Northern Cyprus which has made laws governing the day-to-day lives of the people.”

There are more cases like this as well, where as non recognition of a state does not mean that its legal system should not be recognized as well.

One example is a where Supreme Court of USA has accepted the court rullings of confederate states during the civil war in USA. ALthough USA has never accepted the secession of confederate states from the union, and has never recognized confederate states as a lagal entity, its supreme court upholded the decisions made by the confederate courts during the civil war.

There are other cases involving Manchuria, Taiwan, Kasmir, etc. etc. where the unrecognition of the state does not imply unacceptance of court decisions under those regimes.

In short there are plenty of examples where de-facto partitioning of a state is accepted on law where de-jure particioning is rejected.

I am not saying that in the future cases, and UK court or any other court will uphold these decisions of TRNC courts or commisions, or accept them as a legal entity. All I am saying is there are legal precedent to these. OF course every case involves its own seperate merits and has to be studies seperately, and one can not say either this or taht will happen.

[magikthrill]

Turkcyp,

the us supreme court recognized the decisions AFTER the confederacy became part of the union again. obviously this is the right decision. on the other hand recognizing court decisions of the pseudo state while Turkey is still occupying Cyprus is controversial for the obvios reasons. One side is TCs are also people and they shouldn't be left in the dark like they dont exist while the other side is if they choose to accept the pseudo state (and along with it the human rights violations it has imposed on GCs) then that's what they get.

As you can see coming to a decision (for me at least) is conflicting because, as a humanitarian above all, both sides have right causes.

[-mikkie2-]

I think the 'trnc' has very little, if any, scope to take advantage of the Loizidou case. The 'trnc' is deemed to be a subordinate administration to Turkey and therefore any 'legal' documents, such as deeds or contracts, will be deemed to be invalid under the eyes of international law.

The valid title deeds for Loizidous and any other refugee property in the north is the one that was issued by the Republic of Cyprus, so even if Loizidou was given access to her property, her original title deeds will be deemed valid, not any that are issued by the 'trnc'.

So, in short, even if Loizidou accepted to reclaim her property, it would not constitute acceptance of the laws and rules of the north or her recognition of it. On the contrary, if Turkey does go ahead and give all GC's the right to their property it could have the effect of handing back control to the RoC. Loizidou could legitimately not pay taxes on her property (but can legitimately pay them under the RoC) for the reason that the title deeds issued by the 'trnc' are non valid, therefore any such attempt to force payment could in fact force the issue back to the ECHR with another judgement against Turkey!

[insan]

Here's my 2 cents:


- According to international law, 3rd Vienna agreement(1975) and High Level Agreements(1979); all Cypriots have all kinds of rights on their properties unless their claims and demands contradict with the laws and agreements concerning those rights.

- Like Loizidou case, all Cypriots have the right to sue the relevant persons/institutions or the authorities with the same demands and claims.

- Why Loizidou sued Turkey and not the authorities of North?

1- Because Loizidou accused Turkey concerning the violations of her rights.

2- There was no mutually agreed(Between South and North) local authorities to undertake the issues concerning the violations and rights on these properties. And that's why one established in the North but it is not a mutually agreed authority, moreover it does not subsume everything related right to property. It was just established for exchange and compensate the people who have claims on their properties. This is the first problem concerning the properties, freedom of movement and resettlement in the boundaries of international laws and agreements.

3- Unresolved Cyprus problem is the second obstacle before the property issues; freedom of movement and return. If the requirements of 3rd Vienna agreement has been fullfilled(especially by Turkish side); firdt of all thousands of GCs would have never been obliged to flee to the South. Those were the days when anarchy and terror hit Turkey and led her to a big economic crisis which followed by a coup in 1980. In this time period, the pillagers of North marauded to the properties belong to GCs and oppressed the ones who had prefered to stay in the North according to 3rd Vienna agreement. There's a big exploitation of 3rd Vienna agreement particularly in 1975-80 period and afterwards, by the plunderers of Turkish side.


For whatever reasons, excuses this has been done;(retaliation, hatred or greedness) they exploited the rights of thousands GCs and violated the 3rd Vienna agreement which Turkish side put its sign under it.

[insan]

So, in short, even if Loizidou accepted to reclaim her property, it would not constitute acceptance of the laws and rules of the north or her recognition of it.

If there has been a more proper and a mutually agreed bi-communal property commission to resolve the issues regarding the properties and return; it would have worked according to the 3rd Vienna agreement. Therfore, under those circumstances if Loizidou accepted to reclaim her property, it would constitute acceptance of the existing agreements and recognition of two federal zones.

[magikthrill]

insan,

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say with the Vienna agreement. I mean, if you are to accept international laws then you are to accept that northern cyprus is what it is , a pseudo-state.

unless of course you said nothing of that.