Cyprus-Forum.com

[T_C]

This hasn't bothered many TCs that I know...it's the government we're after...not peoples homes...

The only riches you say these last 35 years have been from illegally selling GC homes ... so now that's all of a sudden not what you're after?

Hypocrites ... what can you find to bleed the RoC of now?

What are you talking about? What riches?

I've always been in favour of people going back to their homes....the only reason I would ever support partition is to get away from people like yourself...

[T_C]

This hasn't bothered many TCs that I know...it's the government we're after...not peoples homes...

which "government" are you after, T_C ?

The RoC government ofcourse, and our rightful place inside it...

[insan]

This is an interesting view from an North Cyprus Forum. If this court judgement pushes the north into Turkish annexation, the EU writ will therefore no longer apply.

Somebody once said, be careful what you wish for.

The quote starts here.

What Happens Next ?

1. It should be noted that the judgment of the EU does not rule on the intrinsic merits of the Apostolides vs Orams case. The judgement is a response to the queries raised by Lord Phillips of the UK Appeal Court.

2. The appeal of Mr Apostolides in the UK can now re-commence and Lord Phillips will have the benefit of the advice from the ECJ to assist in his deliberations.


Linda & David Orams
3. If the UK Court of Appeal follows the advice of the ECJ, they will agree to register the judgments of the court of South Cyprus which found in favour of Mr Apostolides. At this stage, it is likely that the Orams would be granted leave to appeal to the House of Lords. This will prolong the matter for several years.

4. If Mr Apostolides, at the end of the UK appeal process, is successful in registering the judgment of the South Cyprus courts, then he can make an application to the UK courts for the Orams to demolish the house in Lapta, North Cyprus and pay him compensation. If the Orams fail to comply, then he can make a further application to a UK court so that their assets in the UK are seized.


Technical Points

1. Regulation 44/2001 is limited to civil and commercial matters. It does not extend to ‘revenue, customs or administrative matters.' The ECJ recognises, in para 40 of the judgment, that it could be argued that the Apostolides vs Orams dispute is not simply a civil dispute between two parties.

This is an understatement. It is generally agreed that the dispute has been promoted and financed by the authorities of South Cyprus and that the defence of the case against the Orams has been financed by North Cyprus and/or Turkey. Mr Apostolides and the Orams are considered mere pawns in a larger game.

The penultimate paragraph of the ECJ ruling on this matter, para 45, concludes that the case is between individuals and that no public authorities are involved. The costs alone of the case to date discredit this opinion, and the ECJ could be challenged on this point.

2. The process of law in South Cyprus could and has been challenged by the lawyers defending the Orams. The writ was handed to Mrs Orams at Lapta, but she did not sign for it. The papers were written in Greek and it took Mrs Orams some time to have them translated, by which time a default judgment had been made.

These issues, and several others, could lead one to the view that the Orams' rights were infringed by the courts of South Cyprus.

3. The default judgment of the South Cyprus court orders the Orams, among other things, ‘to deliver to Mr Apostolides free possession of the land'. It is not within the power of Linda Orams to comply with this ruling.

It is generally accepted that Linda & David Orams bought and paid for the land and property in accordance with the regulations of the TRNC, and that the land and transaction was registered with the TRNC authorities. TRNC title deeds are guaranteed by the TRNC authorities and it is not within the power of Linda Orams to rescind a TRNC title deed in favour of Mr Apostolides. Her inability to comply with the judgment undermines the ruling.

The TRNC authorities have established an Immovable Properties Commission to deal with claims by dispossessed Greek Cypriots, and this would be the appropriate body to deal with Mr Apostolides' claim.

4. Article 34 of 44/2001 states that a judgment shall not be recognised ‘if such recognition is manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State in which recognition is sought.' In this regard, the Member State is the UK.

A convincing case could be made that registration of the judgment in the UK is indeed contrary to public policy. The UK government is a guarantor power with respect to Cyprus, and administered the island until 1960. The UK has supported efforts to end the international isolation of North Cyprus and supported the Annan Plan for the re-unification of the island.

One could argue that the issues raised by the Apostolides vs Orams case should be resolved by a comprehensive political settlement rather than a series of legal rulings which emanate from a partisan court. Therefore, registration of the judgment would be contrary to UK public policy.

Strategic Options

1. The fact that the ECJ considers the inability of the government of South Cyprus to enforce its authority in the North as a temporary situation is a major problem.

The leaders of the two communities have given credence to this view by their continued meetings and positive statements concerning a unified Cyprus.

Following the April 2009 elections in North Cyprus, the National Unity Party (UBP) won 44% of the vote and the incoming administration is less optimistic as to the possibility of a positive outcome to these negotiations. The UBP favours a two state solution.

If the temporary partition of Cyprus becomes permanent and there is a request for recognition of a separate state, the EU will be forced to review and possibly abandon its recognition of the government of the Greek Republic of Cyprus as the legitimate ruling body of the entire island.

2. The rights of dispossessed persons is an issue which affects Turkish Cypriots who lost land and property in South Cyprus, in addition to Greek Cypriots who lost land in the North.

It would be useful for several significant claims to be lodged by Turkish Cypriots with the European Court of Human Rights in order to dispel the myth that it is only Greek Cypriots who have been dispossessed. It is generally considered that Larnaca Airport is build on Turkish Cypriot land, and this would be a useful target.

In addition to promoting any such claims to the European Court of Human Rights, an application to the courts of South Cyprus could be made in order to provide publicity for this issue.

Conclusion

The Greek Cypriot case has undoubtedly been strengthened by this ruling. The immediate impact will be to discourage EU nationals from purchasing property in North Cyprus. This will have a significant impact on the already fragile North Cyprus economy and tax revenues.

While there will undoubtedly be jubilation in sections of the Greek Cypriot government and media, this is a sad day for Cyprus. The Orams ruling, following on from the victory of the UBP in the election, marks a watershed in the history of the island.

For the last 10 years there has been hope that the island would be re-united, and there remain people within both communities who embrace this dream. Despite the rejection by the Greek Cypriots of the Annan Plan, the Turkish Cypriot community continued to support efforts to negotiate a settlement and were prepared to make significant sacrifices of land and property to this end.

The tide of public opinion in the North is now turning, and the window of opportunity for a united Cyprus is closing. Permanent partition and a proposal for a two state solution are in the ascendancy.

Copyright © Leslie Hardy – 29 April 2009

http://www.wellestates.com/orams_ecj.htm

----------------------------- 0000000000000000000 --------------------------


The tide of public opinion in the North is now turning, and the window of opportunity for a united Cyprus is closing. Permanent partition and a proposal for a two state solution are in the ascendancy.

After the 46 years of failure of the efforts to reconcile Turks and Hellenes; partition is what "they" want but don't propose it officially for some well known reasons.

As usual, it is better to create the suitable circumstances that will lead both sides asking for partition.

Step 1 of final stage of partition has been completed.

Hmmm!

What do ya think?

rawk

Isn't this the same quote as the one at he start of this thread? And isn't the quote at the start of this thread also the same as the quote at the start of another thread ("What Happens Next?"). Are you and Insan the same person? And are you doing this as a diversionary tactic, or do you hope that by posting the same quote several times you might get lucky?

We r not same person and I don't know why Rawk did this.

[Hatter]

We r not same person and I don't know why Rawk did this.

Why did you? You seem to have started two separate threads with the same quote.

[insan]

We r not same person and I don't know why Rawk did this.

Why did you? You seem to have started two separate threads with the same quote.

U must be sleepy and tired, Hatter.

[Get Real!]

This is an interesting view from an North Cyprus Forum. If this court judgement pushes the north into Turkish annexation, the EU writ will therefore no longer apply.

Turkey doesn’t have the spine (financial, military, or influential) to annex anything without EU and US support and approval.

[polis]

The quote starts here.

...........

Technical Points

1. Regulation 44/2001 is limited to civil and commercial matters. It does not extend to ‘revenue, customs or administrative matters.' The ECJ recognises, in para 40 of the judgment, that it could be argued that the Apostolides vs Orams dispute is not simply a civil dispute between two parties.

This is an understatement. It is generally agreed that the dispute has been promoted and financed by the authorities of South Cyprus and that the defence of the case against the Orams has been financed by North Cyprus and/or Turkey. Mr Apostolides and the Orams are considered mere pawns in a larger game.

The penultimate paragraph of the ECJ ruling on this matter, para 45, concludes that the case is between individuals and that no public authorities are involved. The costs alone of the case to date discredit this opinion, and the ECJ could be challenged on this point.

2. The process of law in South Cyprus could and has been challenged by the lawyers defending the Orams. The writ was handed to Mrs Orams at Lapta, but she did not sign for it. The papers were written in Greek and it took Mrs Orams some time to have them translated, by which time a default judgment had been made.

These issues, and several others, could lead one to the view that the Orams' rights were infringed by the courts of South Cyprus.

3. The default judgment of the South Cyprus court orders the Orams, among other things, ‘to deliver to Mr Apostolides free possession of the land'. It is not within the power of Linda Orams to comply with this ruling.

It is generally accepted that Linda & David Orams bought and paid for the land and property in accordance with the regulations of the TRNC, and that the land and transaction was registered with the TRNC authorities. TRNC title deeds are guaranteed by the TRNC authorities and it is not within the power of Linda Orams to rescind a TRNC title deed in favour of Mr Apostolides. Her inability to comply with the judgment undermines the ruling.

The TRNC authorities have established an Immovable Properties Commission to deal with claims by dispossessed Greek Cypriots, and this would be the appropriate body to deal with Mr Apostolides' claim.

4. Article 34 of 44/2001 states that a judgment shall not be recognised ‘if such recognition is manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State in which recognition is sought.' In this regard, the Member State is the UK.

A convincing case could be made that registration of the judgment in the UK is indeed contrary to public policy. The UK government is a guarantor power with respect to Cyprus, and administered the island until 1960. The UK has supported efforts to end the international isolation of North Cyprus and supported the Annan Plan for the re-unification of the island.

One could argue that the issues raised by the Apostolides vs Orams case should be resolved by a comprehensive political settlement rather than a series of legal rulings which emanate from a partisan court. Therefore, registration of the judgment would be contrary to UK public policy.

What a load of nonsense. If the authors actually bothered to read the judgment of the ECJ ruling they'd know all these points are answered in the ruling which is final and binding on the Court of Appeal. The Orams case is closed. Now it's a matter of selling their assets to satisfy the massive legal fees they will be ordered to pay in the case as well as to pay the damages award in favour of the Apostolides family.

[EPSILON]

The Wall Street Journal
EUROPE NEWS
April 28, 2009, 10:39 A.M. ET

Court Ruling Complicates Cyprus Peace Talks

This reminds me the Armenian genocide/ Basis Turkey/Armenia is closed to reach an agreement to reopen boarders lets consider that Armenians genocide not effected !!!in order to not create difficulties to above agreement procedures.

Turks!!!!!!!!I repeat we need an Ertogan to lead G/cs in Cyprus case.

[YFred]

This sounds as though its the begining of the end of the peace talks and a settlement, it will lead to Eroglu being elected then followed by the hawks winning in Turkey. The Turks will turn their back on the EU and there goes the RoC trump card. Two state solution beckons. What is really sad is that I can't see how this ruling will give this man his house back. Will he ever be able to sleep one night in this property? and it will be seen as the action that finally killed the process.

Orams ruling niggling Cyprus talks
By Simon Bahceli

A TANGIBLE sense of anger and indignation hung over the breakaway Turkish Cypriot north as it woke up yesterday to the implications of Tuesday’s European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling on the Orams case, and how it might affect the ongoing peace talks.

“Everything is possible now,” spokesman for the Turkish Cypriot leadership Hasan Ercakica told the Cyprus Mail yesterday when asked how they planned to react to the ruling.

The ECJ decision backed a Nicosia court ruling ordering British expat couple David and Linda Orams to demolish a house they had built on the Lapithos property of Greek Cypriot refugee Meletis Apostolides.

“I don’t want to say what the possibilities are, and I can’t say what is going to happen next, but everything that might come to mind is a possibility,” Ercakica said while clearly implying that the Cyprus negotiations might be affected.

Turkish Cypriot media touted that it was “the end of the talks”, while on the Greek Cypriot side government spokesman Stefanos Stefanou said the decision would have a direct effect on negotiations.

Ercakica’s comments came after a meeting between the Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat and leaders of political parties in the north – a meeting at which the Turkish Cypriot political leaders expressed “unprecedented unity”.

“If there is one thing for us to feel happy and secure about it is the fact that we are all agreed in our reaction to this,” Ercakica said.

Although previously aware that the ruling was likely to go against the Orams, Talat’s spokesman said the Greek Cypriot leadership’s obvious pleasure at the ruling “revealed a lack of sincerity” at ongoing UN-sponsored reunification talks.

“If Christofias believes he can solve the property issue in the courts, why doesn’t he go and do it? And if he thinks he can do it this way, why doesn’t he leave the negotiating table? Can he please explain this to his people and the international community?”

But ruling AKEL’s general secretary, Andros Kyprianou, said: “These approaches are extreme. The court very correctly has said that nobody can illegally use the property of someone else. The message here is that there needs to be an end to the illegal constructions on properties belonging to Greek Cypriots and at the same time the solution to the Cyprus problem must take into consideration certain basic principles of international justice.” He added: “We feel the arguments of our side have been reinforced. So we wish and hope that the Turkish side, interpreting this ruling correctly, it approaches the negotiations table and positions itself in way that will be harmonised with the ECJ ruling.”

On Tuesday evening Talat appeared on local ‘state’ TV accusing the EU of “once again showing it does not play a positive role in seeking a solution to the Cyprus problem”. This he did despite being one of the north’s main proponents of EU accession for the breakaway state. He also said he believed cases such as the Orams would do little more than increase tensions between the two communities, thus making a solution yet harder to secure.

Although reported to be “angry, disappointed and concerned” about the ruling, Talat’s reaction was less severe than that of former leader Rauf Denktash who said it was a reason to call off negotiations with the Greek Cypriots.

“If it was me, I would leave the negotiating table,” he was quoted as saying in a Turkish Cypriot daily. He added criticism however for both Turkey and the north for not having been more involved in the case.

“How many times have I said Turkey and the TRNC’s government have to involve themselves in this case. It is being handled with just the testimony of one side,” he said.

A spokesman for the National Unity Party (UBP), which will take over the breakaway north’s administration in the coming days, also hit out at the ruling, saying that it was “unfair and one sided”.

“The chief judge was a Greek, and another of the judges was none other than Myra Arestis’ husband”. Arestis won a ruling at the European Court of Human Rights two years ago ordering Turkey to compensate her for the loss of use of her property in Varosha.

“If a judge has any personal interests in the outcome of a case they are presiding over, they are ethically obliged to withdraw,” the spokesman added.

There were other objections to the ruling. Turkish Cypriot international law expert and lecturer at the Eastern Mediterranean University (EMU) in Famagusta Kutred Ozersay said he believed the ruling rested on “weak ground”

“For such a big issue to be dealt with in a 12-page report seems to me to not to do justice to it,” he said. He added that the court had “ignored political issues” that gave the case implications well beyond the lives of Apostolides and the Oramses.

“This is not about individuals; it’s an international conflict,” he said, adding a call on the UK Appeals Court, where the ECJ’s ruling will go for implementation, to take this into account.

“The UK has to know that if it doesn’t take measures during the final stages of the case in the UK court, the continuation of negotiations in Cyprus – particularly on the property issue – will be meaningless. This is extremely serious,” he warned.

Ozersay however that it was difficult for the British court to do anything but ratify the ECJ ruling because “the wording on public policy issues narrows the scope of the discretionary power of the UK court to refuse to implement the ruling on public policy grounds, and public policy is the only grounds that can be used as a reason not to implement it”.

His only hope, he said, was that the British government, realising the implications for ongoing negotiations, might seek to impress on the court the need to take heed of the political issues relating to the case.

“This can be done through political statements that might indirectly make the court aware of the issues. Another way would be for the judge to delay proceedings while seeking the views of the Foreign Office. This is not unprecedented,” Ozersay said.

Copyright © Cyprus Mail 2009

[DT.]

This sounds as though its the begining of the end of the peace talks and a settlement, it will lead to Eroglu being elected then followed by the hawks winning in Turkey. The Turks will turn their back on the EU and there goes the RoC trump card. Two state solution beckons. What is really sad is that I can't see how this ruling will give this man his house back. Will he ever be able to sleep one night in this property? and it will be seen as the action that finally killed the process.

Orams ruling niggling Cyprus talks
By Simon Bahceli

A TANGIBLE sense of anger and indignation hung over the breakaway Turkish Cypriot north as it woke up yesterday to the implications of Tuesday’s European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling on the Orams case, and how it might affect the ongoing peace talks.

“Everything is possible now,” spokesman for the Turkish Cypriot leadership Hasan Ercakica told the Cyprus Mail yesterday when asked how they planned to react to the ruling.

The ECJ decision backed a Nicosia court ruling ordering British expat couple David and Linda Orams to demolish a house they had built on the Lapithos property of Greek Cypriot refugee Meletis Apostolides.

“I don’t want to say what the possibilities are, and I can’t say what is going to happen next, but everything that might come to mind is a possibility,” Ercakica said while clearly implying that the Cyprus negotiations might be affected.

Turkish Cypriot media touted that it was “the end of the talks”, while on the Greek Cypriot side government spokesman Stefanos Stefanou said the decision would have a direct effect on negotiations.

Ercakica’s comments came after a meeting between the Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat and leaders of political parties in the north – a meeting at which the Turkish Cypriot political leaders expressed “unprecedented unity”.

“If there is one thing for us to feel happy and secure about it is the fact that we are all agreed in our reaction to this,” Ercakica said.

Although previously aware that the ruling was likely to go against the Orams, Talat’s spokesman said the Greek Cypriot leadership’s obvious pleasure at the ruling “revealed a lack of sincerity” at ongoing UN-sponsored reunification talks.

“If Christofias believes he can solve the property issue in the courts, why doesn’t he go and do it? And if he thinks he can do it this way, why doesn’t he leave the negotiating table? Can he please explain this to his people and the international community?”

But ruling AKEL’s general secretary, Andros Kyprianou, said: “These approaches are extreme. The court very correctly has said that nobody can illegally use the property of someone else. The message here is that there needs to be an end to the illegal constructions on properties belonging to Greek Cypriots and at the same time the solution to the Cyprus problem must take into consideration certain basic principles of international justice.” He added: “We feel the arguments of our side have been reinforced. So we wish and hope that the Turkish side, interpreting this ruling correctly, it approaches the negotiations table and positions itself in way that will be harmonised with the ECJ ruling.”

On Tuesday evening Talat appeared on local ‘state’ TV accusing the EU of “once again showing it does not play a positive role in seeking a solution to the Cyprus problem”. This he did despite being one of the north’s main proponents of EU accession for the breakaway state. He also said he believed cases such as the Orams would do little more than increase tensions between the two communities, thus making a solution yet harder to secure.

Although reported to be “angry, disappointed and concerned” about the ruling, Talat’s reaction was less severe than that of former leader Rauf Denktash who said it was a reason to call off negotiations with the Greek Cypriots.

“If it was me, I would leave the negotiating table,” he was quoted as saying in a Turkish Cypriot daily. He added criticism however for both Turkey and the north for not having been more involved in the case.

“How many times have I said Turkey and the TRNC’s government have to involve themselves in this case. It is being handled with just the testimony of one side,” he said.

A spokesman for the National Unity Party (UBP), which will take over the breakaway north’s administration in the coming days, also hit out at the ruling, saying that it was “unfair and one sided”.

“The chief judge was a Greek, and another of the judges was none other than Myra Arestis’ husband”. Arestis won a ruling at the European Court of Human Rights two years ago ordering Turkey to compensate her for the loss of use of her property in Varosha.

“If a judge has any personal interests in the outcome of a case they are presiding over, they are ethically obliged to withdraw,” the spokesman added.

There were other objections to the ruling. Turkish Cypriot international law expert and lecturer at the Eastern Mediterranean University (EMU) in Famagusta Kutred Ozersay said he believed the ruling rested on “weak ground”

“For such a big issue to be dealt with in a 12-page report seems to me to not to do justice to it,” he said. He added that the court had “ignored political issues” that gave the case implications well beyond the lives of Apostolides and the Oramses.

“This is not about individuals; it’s an international conflict,” he said, adding a call on the UK Appeals Court, where the ECJ’s ruling will go for implementation, to take this into account.

“The UK has to know that if it doesn’t take measures during the final stages of the case in the UK court, the continuation of negotiations in Cyprus – particularly on the property issue – will be meaningless. This is extremely serious,” he warned.

Ozersay however that it was difficult for the British court to do anything but ratify the ECJ ruling because “the wording on public policy issues narrows the scope of the discretionary power of the UK court to refuse to implement the ruling on public policy grounds, and public policy is the only grounds that can be used as a reason not to implement it”.

His only hope, he said, was that the British government, realising the implications for ongoing negotiations, might seek to impress on the court the need to take heed of the political issues relating to the case.

“This can be done through political statements that might indirectly make the court aware of the issues. Another way would be for the judge to delay proceedings while seeking the views of the Foreign Office. This is not unprecedented,” Ozersay said.

Copyright © Cyprus Mail 2009

This must be a positive development when crypto-partitionists are starting to mourn the end of the talks.