Cyprus-Forum.com

[miltiades]

The Orams by publicly proclaiming their intention to abide by the Courts decision and by removing themselves from the villa have placed themselves above any accusations of contempt of court.
If the "authorities " in the "trnc" refuse to grant them permission to demolish the villa , the Orams can do absolutely nothing about it and the Courts will be powerless in taking any action against them .

[Malapapa]

Contempt of court is a serious matter in civilised countries. I do hope the people making these decisions have thought these things through. I'd hate to see Talat detained next time he lands in the UK, unless its for claiming political asylum.

How would Talat be in contempt of court?

Because his regime would be standing in the way of a court order.

[vaughanwilliams]

The Orams by publicly proclaiming their intention to abide by the Courts decision and by removing themselves from the villa have placed themselves above any accusations of contempt of court.
If the "authorities " in the "trnc" refuse to grant them permission to demolish the villa , the Orams can do absolutely nothing about it and the Courts will be powerless in taking any action against them .

This demonstrates that Mr. Apostolides may have got a financial award (which could never have justified his potential costs risk) but he hasn't got and never could have got possesion of either the villa or the land it stands on. Whilst in an ideal world it would have done so, such cases cannot be said to be attempts to reposess land/property claimed by GCs, but attempts to disrupt the economy of the TRNC and discourage potential EU buyers. Nothing at all wrong with that as a legitimate tactic provided it is honestly stated as being just a tactic and not passed-off as an attempt at recovering property for sentimental reasons or "on principle." However, such tactics could be said to undermine genuine settlement talks when they are underway. For this reason, I think the UK court could have stalled the ruling.

[vaughanwilliams]

Contempt of court is a serious matter in civilised countries. I do hope the people making these decisions have thought these things through. I'd hate to see Talat detained next time he lands in the UK, unless its for claiming political asylum.

How would Talat be in contempt of court?

Because his regime would be standing in the way of a court order.

So take his regime to court (and see where it gets you).
Simples.

[Malapapa]

The Orams by publicly proclaiming their intention to abide by the Courts decision and by removing themselves from the villa have placed themselves above any accusations of contempt of court.
If the "authorities " in the "trnc" refuse to grant them permission to demolish the villa , the Orams can do absolutely nothing about it and the Courts will be powerless in taking any action against them .

This demonstrates that Mr. Apostolides may have got a financial award (which could never have justified his potential costs risk) but he hasn't got and never could have got possesion of either the villa or the land it stands on. Whilst in an ideal world it would have done so, such cases cannot be said to be attempts to reposess land/property claimed by GCs, but attempts to disrupt the economy of the TRNC and discourage potential EU buyers. Nothing at all wrong with that as a legitimate tactic provided it is honestly stated as being just a tactic and not passed-off as an attempt at recovering property for sentimental reasons or "on principle." However, such tactics could be said to undermine genuine settlement talks when they are underway. For this reason, I think the UK court could have stalled the ruling.

They could be said to undermine genuine settlement talks. But not by anyone objective, like a high court judge interested in nothing else other than administering justice, and without a vested interested in maintaining illegalities in the north... someone like you, perhaps.

[vaughanwilliams]

The Orams by publicly proclaiming their intention to abide by the Courts decision and by removing themselves from the villa have placed themselves above any accusations of contempt of court.
If the "authorities " in the "trnc" refuse to grant them permission to demolish the villa , the Orams can do absolutely nothing about it and the Courts will be powerless in taking any action against them .

This demonstrates that Mr. Apostolides may have got a financial award (which could never have justified his potential costs risk) but he hasn't got and never could have got possesion of either the villa or the land it stands on. Whilst in an ideal world it would have done so, such cases cannot be said to be attempts to reposess land/property claimed by GCs, but attempts to disrupt the economy of the TRNC and discourage potential EU buyers. Nothing at all wrong with that as a legitimate tactic provided it is honestly stated as being just a tactic and not passed-off as an attempt at recovering property for sentimental reasons or "on principle." However, such tactics could be said to undermine genuine settlement talks when they are underway. For this reason, I think the UK court could have stalled the ruling.

They could be said to undermine genuine settlement talks. But not by anyone objective, like a high court judge interested in nothing else other than administering justice, and without a vested interested in maintaining illegalities in the north... someone like you, perhaps.

Of course, courts and Judges are above politics (or should be) but I am sure that they can make decisions based on reality and not in isolation, where this can be seen to be of benefit to the "bigger picture". I am sure that you are as genuinely interested in seeing a realistic and lasting settlement, as most of us are, and wouldn't want to see the talks undermined anymore than anyone else would.

[Malapapa]

The Orams by publicly proclaiming their intention to abide by the Courts decision and by removing themselves from the villa have placed themselves above any accusations of contempt of court.
If the "authorities " in the "trnc" refuse to grant them permission to demolish the villa , the Orams can do absolutely nothing about it and the Courts will be powerless in taking any action against them .

This demonstrates that Mr. Apostolides may have got a financial award (which could never have justified his potential costs risk) but he hasn't got and never could have got possesion of either the villa or the land it stands on. Whilst in an ideal world it would have done so, such cases cannot be said to be attempts to reposess land/property claimed by GCs, but attempts to disrupt the economy of the TRNC and discourage potential EU buyers. Nothing at all wrong with that as a legitimate tactic provided it is honestly stated as being just a tactic and not passed-off as an attempt at recovering property for sentimental reasons or "on principle." However, such tactics could be said to undermine genuine settlement talks when they are underway. For this reason, I think the UK court could have stalled the ruling.

They could be said to undermine genuine settlement talks. But not by anyone objective, like a high court judge interested in nothing else other than administering justice, and without a vested interested in maintaining illegalities in the north... someone like you, perhaps.

Of course, courts and Judges are above politics (or should be) but I am sure that they can make decisions based on reality and not in isolation, where this can be seen to be of benefit to the "bigger picture". I am sure that you are as genuinely interested in seeing a realistic and lasting settlement, as most of us are, and wouldn't want to see the talks undermined anymore than anyone else would.

Indeed. But you see, like the judge, I believe this legal opinion hasn't underminded the talks. I believe this has enhanced them because it prevents one side from continuing to talk bollo...x.

[vaughanwilliams]

The Orams by publicly proclaiming their intention to abide by the Courts decision and by removing themselves from the villa have placed themselves above any accusations of contempt of court.
If the "authorities " in the "trnc" refuse to grant them permission to demolish the villa , the Orams can do absolutely nothing about it and the Courts will be powerless in taking any action against them .

This demonstrates that Mr. Apostolides may have got a financial award (which could never have justified his potential costs risk) but he hasn't got and never could have got possesion of either the villa or the land it stands on. Whilst in an ideal world it would have done so, such cases cannot be said to be attempts to reposess land/property claimed by GCs, but attempts to disrupt the economy of the TRNC and discourage potential EU buyers. Nothing at all wrong with that as a legitimate tactic provided it is honestly stated as being just a tactic and not passed-off as an attempt at recovering property for sentimental reasons or "on principle." However, such tactics could be said to undermine genuine settlement talks when they are underway. For this reason, I think the UK court could have stalled the ruling.

They could be said to undermine genuine settlement talks. But not by anyone objective, like a high court judge interested in nothing else other than administering justice, and without a vested interested in maintaining illegalities in the north... someone like you, perhaps.

Of course, courts and Judges are above politics (or should be) but I am sure that they can make decisions based on reality and not in isolation, where this can be seen to be of benefit to the "bigger picture". I am sure that you are as genuinely interested in seeing a realistic and lasting settlement, as most of us are, and wouldn't want to see the talks undermined anymore than anyone else would.

Indeed. But you see, like the judge, I believe this legal opinion hasn't underminded the talks. I believe this has enhanced them because it prevents one side from continuing to talk bollo...x.

Well, what can I say? The GCs have always been known as being full of it.
Seriously, the GCs now think "Who cares about the talks? If we can't get our land back by talking, we'll do it in the courts." WRONG!
You now know from the Orams case that Mr. A got everything back EXCEPT his land.

[Malapapa]

Indeed. But you see, like the judge, I believe this legal opinion hasn't underminded the talks. I believe this has enhanced them because it prevents one side from continuing to talk bollo...x.

Well, what can I say? The GCs have always been known as being full of it.

Have they? I wouldn't know. I'm interested in justice for all Cypriots and bringing outlaws to justice.

Seriously, the GCs now think "Who cares about the talks? If we can't get our land back by talking, we'll do it in the courts." WRONG!

How else do you propose people who've been usurped from their land get it back? Through force?

You now know from the Orams case that Mr. A got everything back EXCEPT his land.

His land is still his land. If outlaws are preventing him from using it, all he has is the law to challenge them.

[Kifeas]

The Orams by publicly proclaiming their intention to abide by the Courts decision and by removing themselves from the villa have placed themselves above any accusations of contempt of court.
If the "authorities " in the "trnc" refuse to grant them permission to demolish the villa , the Orams can do absolutely nothing about it and the Courts will be powerless in taking any action against them .

This demonstrates that Mr. Apostolides may have got a financial award (which could never have justified his potential costs risk) but he hasn't got and never could have got possesion of either the villa or the land it stands on. Whilst in an ideal world it would have done so, such cases cannot be said to be attempts to reposess land/property claimed by GCs, but attempts to disrupt the economy of the TRNC and discourage potential EU buyers. Nothing at all wrong with that as a legitimate tactic provided it is honestly stated as being just a tactic and not passed-off as an attempt at recovering property for sentimental reasons or "on principle." However, such tactics could be said to undermine genuine settlement talks when they are underway. For this reason, I think the UK court could have stalled the ruling.

Really Vaughanwilliams, really??? "Such tactics (to disrupt the economy of the TRNC and discourage potential EU buyers) could be said to undermine genuine settlement talks when they are underway?" Really??? In other words, under the pre-text that settlement talks are underway -and which might as well be underway for an indefinite period of time; you wish to retain the free hand and a free ride to a continues looting of illegally usurped GC properties in the occupied north -obviously until none is left to be returned back to its legal owners one day, so as not to "disturb" the talks under way. This is what you are basically saying, Mr. crook, but let me tell you what I say! What I say, in Turkish is called SIKTIR, and in English, well, figure it out yourself!