Cyprus-Forum.com

[CBBB]

By Stefanos Evripidou

THE EUROPEAN Court ruling on the Orams case could have worldwide implications for investors in the north, giving Greek Cypriots recourse to assets held outside the European Union, warned a human rights lawyer yesterday.

The ruling opens the door to Greek Cypriot refugees pursuing the assets of foreign “buyers” of their land in any one of the 27 EU member states, and even beyond, said Achilleas Demetriades.

The European Court of Justice ruling (ECJ) backed a Nicosia court’s judgement earlier this week against the British couple who had built a villa on land belonging to refugee Meletis Apostolides.

Assuming the English Court of Appeal adopts the ECJ ruling, Apostolides will be able to enforce the Nicosia court judgement in England by seizing the Orams’ assets in the UK.

The ruling has been described as a “huge blow” to the Turkish Cypriots with ominous consequences predicted for the economy of the breakaway state, heavily reliant on the sale of Greek Cypriot properties to foreigners.

Demetriades argued that the scope of the ruling went beyond simply discouraging EU citizens not to exploit Greek Cypriot land in the north, but was a warning bell for anyone with assets in the EU, or even in third countries outside the Union.

“This not only affects EU citizens, but also any persons with assets in the EU. For example, if you are from Russia, and have assets in Europe, you can still be caught,” he said.

Even if there are difficulties in executing a judgement against the usurper of your land in Cyprus, “you still have 26 other member states to look for enforceability, thereby increasing your chances”.

The human rights lawyer further suggested the long tentacles of the law could stretch beyond the EU to other countries whose residents have property interests in the north Potentially, judgements could be enforced anywhere in the world where there is a bilateral judicial enforcement agreement with an EU country, possibly including Russia, Israel or even Turkey.

“The question is by registering the judgement in an EU country, can you take that country’s bilateral agreements and then execute in the third country? If, for example, we were to register a judgement in France, which has a reciprocal enforcement of judgement treaty with a third country, say Russia, could you take advantage of that judgement in France and execute it in Russia?” asked Demetriades.

“You can use the other 26 EU member states as stepping stones to execute judgement in a third country on the basis of bilateral agreements which are independent of the EU. Obviously, the main target for this would be Turkish interests which are in abundance in the occupied areas,” he added.

A second possible implication of the ECJ ruling is the potential for civil litigation on events taking place in the north, with execution of the judgements in the south or EU.

“For example, a Greek Cypriot travels to the occupied areas and gets his car crashed into by a Turkish Cypriot in Kyrenia. He may bring an action against the Turkish Cypriot in the Kyrenia district court temporarily situated in Nicosia. If he obtains a judgement, and the defendant has assets in the government-controlled areas or the EU, then he can execute the judgement,” said Demetriades.

The reaction to the ruling in the north has been one of panic and outrage, with calls from some quarters for Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat to pull out of the talks and even resign.

Speaking from London, President Demetris Christofias said the Orams decision should be used effectively in the talks but without adopting extreme positions. “Of course it’s not our position that the property issue and the Cyprus problem will be solved by the courts,” he added.

Hubert Faustmann, an international relations expert, described the ruling as a “huge blow” to the Turkish Cypriots which could prove to be “the kiss of death” in the long-term.

“It’s a huge success for the Greek Cypriots, which adds another layer of urgency to reach a settlement. It’s clear that without a solution, any Greek Cypriot, possibly with government help, can ask for their property back,” he said.

“It’s a vindication of the Greek Cypriot property position in the north, and anyone buying there will know about it. The north’s attractiveness will suffer and there is a huge hefty bill looming on Turkish Cypriots now,” he added.

Faustmann warned that the Turkish Cypriots could also seek redress for their properties in the government-controlled areas which would spark off a property war in the courts.

“Things can get ugly but it depends on how they want to play it and whether they want to escalate it?” he said.

The analyst said both leaders were still determined to find a solution through direct talks and not through the courts. But if the chance is passed, and more people start taking advantage of the Orams ruling, “in the long-run this could be the kiss of death for the north, where property is a huge source of income.”

Copyright © Cyprus Mail 2009

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/news/

An article from the Sunday Cyprus Mail that GR and DT will like for a change!

[Sotos]

The one I fully agree with is this one. This is the first time I agree with Cyprus Mail on a Cyprus Problem article!

IT’S HARD to have any sympathy for David and Linda Orams, or for any of the other expats living on Greek Cypriot properties in the north whose peaceful retirement has been disturbed by the ruling of the European Court of Justice, backing a Nicosia court’s judgement against the British couple who had built a villa on land belonging to refugee Meletis Apostolides.

It would have been different had the case targeted Turkish Cypriots, themselves displaced or in some way victims of the long-running Cyprus conflict. But the Orams, and hundreds of others like them, are effectively guilty of buying stolen property, snatching up the cheap deal offered ‘off the back of a lorry’ while wilfully closing their eyes to the reasons for such a bargain. The least they deserve is to sweat about the future of their ill-gotten gains.

The reaction of Turkish Cypriot politicians is as predictable as it is in bad faith. To say that the welcome for the ruling in the south proves the Greek Cypriots are not serious about reunification is frankly ludicrous. What then is one to say about the orgy of construction and speculation in Greek Cypriot properties in the five years since the failed Annan plan referendum? Has that been a sign of good will? Does it show commitment to reunification in a common homeland?

Did Messrs Talat and Eroglu really expect the European Court of Justice to issue a political judgment, one that would suspend the rule of law in the name of realpolitik? Perhaps they did, much in the same way as Turkey often seems to see its harmonisation process with the European Union as a game of give and take where its strategic weight bears heavily on the scales, rather than as the wholesale adoption – without negotiation – of a body of Community law.

The truth is that the ruling is a severe blow to the north, but if anything it should add urgency to the negotiations rather than bring them to their knees. For what it shows, once again, is the unsustainability of the status quo. For those in the north who thought that in the wake of the Greek Cypriot ‘no’ they could just go it alone and raise a finger across the Green Line, it is a reminder that a future without a settlement is one of uncertainty and continued illegality in the eyes of the international community.

And while the Greek Cypriots may hail the ruling as a vindication of their rights, Meletis Apostolides will know that he is no closer to reclaiming his property than he was a week ago. As President Christofias acknowledged, the Cyprus problem will not be solved by a court decision, however favourable it may be.

Of course, the decision will affect the talks. If only for domestic political consumption, Talat and his team will have to sulk. In response, the Greek Cypriot side must resist the temptation to gloat. And we hope that after a while matters can return to normal – if there is such a thing.

But the Orams ruling must not be forgotten, for it highlights the importance of property as the issue on which any settlement will succeed or fail. One of the greatest undoings of the Annan plan lay in its property provisions, effectively asking the Greek Cypriots to pay compensation to their own refugees for land that had been seized from them by force. (At least the compensation at the so-called property commission is paid out by Turkey.)

Clearly, not all Greek Cypriot refugees will go home, but there has to be an unquestioned acknowledgment of their ownership rights, a mechanism that recognises their title to the property even if it does not necessarily allow them to occupy it, and an externally-funded compensation package that matches the value of the land lost.

If Mr Talat’s vision of a settlement is one that rides roughshod over Greek Cypriot property rights, then he must realise that it will fail. If he feels so strongly that unscrupulous British buyers should have a right to plunder Greek Cypriot property, then it should fail.

If that is the premise on which he is negotiating, then the two sides are talking at cross-purposes, and the European Court ruling is indeed a blow to the entire process. But if he is genuine in his desire for a solution, he will realise that a solution must recognise the property rights of all Cypriots. He will not waste his sympathy on undeserving expats, he will play to the gallery for a week or two, and he will return to the process with ever-greater urgency, spurred by the realisation that a legal limbo can only be to the detriment of all.

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/news/main.php?id=45437

[kafenes]

The one I fully agree with is this one. This is the first time I agree with Cyprus Mail on a Cyprus Problem article!

IT’S HARD to have any sympathy for David and Linda Orams, or for any of the other expats living on Greek Cypriot properties in the north whose peaceful retirement has been disturbed by the ruling of the European Court of Justice, backing a Nicosia court’s judgement against the British couple who had built a villa on land belonging to refugee Meletis Apostolides.

It would have been different had the case targeted Turkish Cypriots, themselves displaced or in some way victims of the long-running Cyprus conflict. But the Orams, and hundreds of others like them, are effectively guilty of buying stolen property, snatching up the cheap deal offered ‘off the back of a lorry’ while wilfully closing their eyes to the reasons for such a bargain. The least they deserve is to sweat about the future of their ill-gotten gains.

The reaction of Turkish Cypriot politicians is as predictable as it is in bad faith. To say that the welcome for the ruling in the south proves the Greek Cypriots are not serious about reunification is frankly ludicrous. What then is one to say about the orgy of construction and speculation in Greek Cypriot properties in the five years since the failed Annan plan referendum? Has that been a sign of good will? Does it show commitment to reunification in a common homeland?

Did Messrs Talat and Eroglu really expect the European Court of Justice to issue a political judgment, one that would suspend the rule of law in the name of realpolitik? Perhaps they did, much in the same way as Turkey often seems to see its harmonisation process with the European Union as a game of give and take where its strategic weight bears heavily on the scales, rather than as the wholesale adoption – without negotiation – of a body of Community law.

The truth is that the ruling is a severe blow to the north, but if anything it should add urgency to the negotiations rather than bring them to their knees. For what it shows, once again, is the unsustainability of the status quo. For those in the north who thought that in the wake of the Greek Cypriot ‘no’ they could just go it alone and raise a finger across the Green Line, it is a reminder that a future without a settlement is one of uncertainty and continued illegality in the eyes of the international community.

And while the Greek Cypriots may hail the ruling as a vindication of their rights, Meletis Apostolides will know that he is no closer to reclaiming his property than he was a week ago. As President Christofias acknowledged, the Cyprus problem will not be solved by a court decision, however favourable it may be.

Of course, the decision will affect the talks. If only for domestic political consumption, Talat and his team will have to sulk. In response, the Greek Cypriot side must resist the temptation to gloat. And we hope that after a while matters can return to normal – if there is such a thing.

But the Orams ruling must not be forgotten, for it highlights the importance of property as the issue on which any settlement will succeed or fail. One of the greatest undoings of the Annan plan lay in its property provisions, effectively asking the Greek Cypriots to pay compensation to their own refugees for land that had been seized from them by force. (At least the compensation at the so-called property commission is paid out by Turkey.)

Clearly, not all Greek Cypriot refugees will go home, but there has to be an unquestioned acknowledgment of their ownership rights, a mechanism that recognises their title to the property even if it does not necessarily allow them to occupy it, and an externally-funded compensation package that matches the value of the land lost.

If Mr Talat’s vision of a settlement is one that rides roughshod over Greek Cypriot property rights, then he must realise that it will fail. If he feels so strongly that unscrupulous British buyers should have a right to plunder Greek Cypriot property, then it should fail.

If that is the premise on which he is negotiating, then the two sides are talking at cross-purposes, and the European Court ruling is indeed a blow to the entire process. But if he is genuine in his desire for a solution, he will realise that a solution must recognise the property rights of all Cypriots. He will not waste his sympathy on undeserving expats, he will play to the gallery for a week or two, and he will return to the process with ever-greater urgency, spurred by the realisation that a legal limbo can only be to the detriment of all.

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/news/main.php?id=45437

Strange thing Sotos. It's the first time I have come accross a Cyprus Mail article which doesn't have the name of the writer. Wonder why?

[miltiades]

The END of illegal sales of Cypriot properties to ALL foreigners. Jews be aware , the day of reckoning is near , Russians and G/Cs too beware the arm of the EU law is expanding continually .

[Viewpoint]

Let the TC counter claims begin, the discrimination of the GC courts in the south will take them to the ECHR everytime they make a judgements linking the TCs property in the south to a comprehensive solution. Viva la legal system.

[Medman]

From the Cyprus Mail Letters section.

Greek Cypriot people and the Cypriot government will understandably welcome the ruling of the European Court of Justice against the Orams’ in their property dispute.

The ramifications will obviously have a great bearing on future property sales in the north. No doubt, of those from the UK who are still thinking of buying, and who may previously have chosen to buy in there, many will now consider buying in the south.

But before the government rubs its hands in glee at this judicial victory and the thought of its positive effect on the depressed property market, it must first set its own house in order by ending all of the criminal practices it effectively presides over, with regard to property deeds.
While the news of the Orams decision will be reported in the UK; it will undoubtedly be accompanied by renewed warnings to prospective British buyers about the Cyprus Government’s failure to act on the criminal injustices it allows to exist regarding property deeds.

Unless it sorts out this mess, and quickly, the time will undoubtedly come when the Cyprus Government finds itself in the dock at the ECJ.

John Francis,
Larnaca

[Hermes]

By Stefanos Evripidou

THE EUROPEAN Court ruling on the Orams case could have worldwide implications for investors in the north, giving Greek Cypriots recourse to assets held outside the European Union, warned a human rights lawyer yesterday.

This is an interesting article. It just goes to prove that the ECJ decision is a stunning judgement which means that thieves and squatters in the north, wherever they are from, can be tracked down, brought to justice and have their assets seized worldwide. The implications are profound for the outcome of negotiations. It's really time for Talat and the T/Cs to get serious in negotiations and acknowledge that the property rights of the pre-1974 owners are validated and cannot be bargained away. It's been a good week for justice.

[Hermes]

Not often I find myself in agreement with the Cyprus Mail but they are spot on this time:

If Mr Talat’s vision of a settlement is one that rides roughshod over Greek Cypriot property rights, then he must realise that it will fail. If he feels so strongly that unscrupulous British buyers should have a right to plunder Greek Cypriot property, then it should fail.

If that is the premise on which he is negotiating, then the two sides are talking at cross-purposes, and the European Court ruling is indeed a blow to the entire process. But if he is genuine in his desire for a solution, he will realise that a solution must recognise the property rights of all Cypriots. He will not waste his sympathy on undeserving expats, he will play to the gallery for a week or two, and he will return to the process with ever-greater urgency, spurred by the realisation that a legal limbo can only be to the detriment of all.

[Piratis]

Not often I find myself in agreement with the Cyprus Mail but they are spot on this time:

If Mr Talat’s vision of a settlement is one that rides roughshod over Greek Cypriot property rights, then he must realise that it will fail. If he feels so strongly that unscrupulous British buyers should have a right to plunder Greek Cypriot property, then it should fail.

If that is the premise on which he is negotiating, then the two sides are talking at cross-purposes, and the European Court ruling is indeed a blow to the entire process. But if he is genuine in his desire for a solution, he will realise that a solution must recognise the property rights of all Cypriots. He will not waste his sympathy on undeserving expats, he will play to the gallery for a week or two, and he will return to the process with ever-greater urgency, spurred by the realisation that a legal limbo can only be to the detriment of all.

I agree. And I will admit that this is a point I was trying to make here in the forum but couldn't put it as good as the author of this article.

Like Kafenes I also wonder why the author of the article is not listed.

[Kikapu]

Not often I find myself in agreement with the Cyprus Mail but they are spot on this time:

If Mr Talat’s vision of a settlement is one that rides roughshod over Greek Cypriot property rights, then he must realise that it will fail. If he feels so strongly that unscrupulous British buyers should have a right to plunder Greek Cypriot property, then it should fail.

If that is the premise on which he is negotiating, then the two sides are talking at cross-purposes, and the European Court ruling is indeed a blow to the entire process. But if he is genuine in his desire for a solution, he will realise that a solution must recognise the property rights of all Cypriots. He will not waste his sympathy on undeserving expats, he will play to the gallery for a week or two, and he will return to the process with ever-greater urgency, spurred by the realisation that a legal limbo can only be to the detriment of all.

I agree. And I will admit that this is a point I was trying to make here in the forum but couldn't put it as good as the author of this article.

Like Kafenes I also wonder why the author of the article is not listed.

He has been placed in the witness protection program for his safety.!