Cyprus-Forum.com

[gabaston]

C'mon Turkcyp

Thats asking a too much. Be fair. Play the game mate.

[turkcyp]

deleted by the author...

[magikthrill]

Dear Magik,

Let me tell you the same thing I have told Kifeas,

Which part of the word hypotheticalyou do not understand?

Theoretically:
Can the previous Louizdou case be overturned by ECHR itself? YES.

And you are saying that it is against “article 1” to overturn. It may very well be, and it may not be either. But it is a possibility, and all I wanted to know what would GC reaction would be “acceptance or rejections”. AS far as I am concerned it is the judges that decides not you, not me. You may have an opinion but as long as you are not one of the judges. Your opinion does not mean anything about what is against “article 1” and what is not.

We are not talking about here what is the probability of the decision being overturned. If there was no probability then there would not be a court hearing to start with. If there is no chance of overturning a previous case why would any defense go to court in the first place. That probability remote or not exists, and I just wanted to know in the hypothetical scenario that it does happen what is the GC reaction going to be.

Amn is it so hard to answer a simple question without going into “But it will not happen, because of this and that…”

Dear turkcyp,

And I told you the response would be to go to court agian and appeal the decision as it violates the european convention on human rights. happy?

[turkcyp]

deleted by the author...

[Kifeas]

Only in the rare cases that public interest is affected. That means public benefit projects. Certainly, a public interest is not affected if the property was sold to a foreigner or it was developed for an individuals benefit. Furthermore it strictly prohibited by the convention for the protection of human rights to restrict any individual’s human rights for the achievement of political objectives. Even a solution of the Cyprus problem, which will regulate the property issue, is highly disputable whether it will not be rented invalid (the property provisions part) by the ECHR.

For you the same thing I can tell, please read “James v. UK (1986) 8 EHRR 123."

In a nutshell what is this rulling all about? What is the point you want to make?

[magikthrill]

And I told you the response would be to go to court agian and appeal the decision as it violates the european convention on human rights. happy?

Ok. But in the meantime before you can prove that it violates the "article 1" you will accept the decision right?
(I mean you are free to try as many times as you can to overturn it. At the end every decision regarding a case looks to its own merits, and looks at the circumstance pertinent to each case.)

As I have said all I wanted to know what the GC reaction would be in a scenario like that.

I have proven that this decision violates this article by just reading it. I mean I can't even think of a loose interpretation of the article that could possible make such a decision legal.

but if you're asking me assuming cows can fly and the appeal does not work then there is nothing much you can do but watch the cows fly.

[Viewpoint]

Kifeas

Then GCs will just stay with the E.U. arrest warrants only and try to push all the E.U. countries to enforce them.

Is this comment revenge driven?, what do you think these arrests will achieve???stop European purchasers?? scare the foreigners already resident in the TRNC?? will it bring us close to a solution??? bring our tow communites together??? build trust??? Could you please clarify.

[turkcyp]

[deleted by the author...

[Kifeas]

Kifeas

Then GCs will just stay with the E.U. arrest warrants only and try to push all the E.U. countries to enforce them.

Is this comment revenge driven?, what do you think these arrests will achieve???stop European purchasers?? scare the foreigners already resident in the TRNC?? will it bring us close to a solution??? bring our tow communites together??? build trust??? Could you please clarify.

Viewpoint,
Yes! the purpose is to scare the foreigners from trnc, scare the developers and scare the buyers. Yes, scare all those crooks that commit illegalities against GC property owners in the north with the sole aim to capitalise on the expense and rights of the lawfull owners.
Do you have a problem?
Are you one one of them? If yes, then you can be worry. I hope you are the next on the list.
If not, the s__t the f__k up and let the people seek their legitimate property rights.

[magikthrill]

It took the world famous “Ian Brownlie” for Mrs. Louzidiou close to 4 years to prove that in the court but you just proved it by reading it. Man you are good.

well then i guess we have 4 years to wait before the cows start shitting down on Cyprus