Cyprus-Forum.com

[DTA]

Someone should remind/inform you that the British stripped the Ottomans of most of this stolen “Vakif” land by setting the record straight when in 1944 they passed the "Immovable Property Law” which returned the great majority of this stolen land back to the Greek Cypriots over successive counter-confiscations.

The legally of which as I understand is being challenged... Ps none of the Vakif land is stolen to say so show just how little you actually know about your fellow cypriots.

Also do not forget, that the remaining "Vakif" land was sold by Denktash and Küçük for the sum of £1.5 million pounds around 1960, which the British have the receipt for the "Bill of Sale".!

I have heard of this before, but even if it is true (and there is some doubt about this), it was not theirs to sell... (only the Vakif trust are the legal owners) The Orams for instance also have 'bill of sale' dont they?

[B25]

Someone should remind/inform you that the British stripped the Ottomans of most of this stolen “Vakif” land by setting the record straight when in 1944 they passed the "Immovable Property Law” which returned the great majority of this stolen land back to the Greek Cypriots over successive counter-confiscations.

The legally of which as I understand is being challenged... Ps none of the Vakif land is stolen to say so show just how little you actually know about your fellow cypriots.

Also do not forget, that the remaining "Vakif" land was sold by Denktash and Küçük for the sum of £1.5 million pounds around 1960, which the British have the receipt for the "Bill of Sale".!

Kiks, it wasn't sold to the British as such. The £1.5m that was paid was a form of compensation for community projects and re-housing of TC's.

This money went into Dentash and Kucuk personal accounts and very little was used for the purpose for which it was given.

I wonder what happened to the rest. By accepting this money they agreed to forfeit all rights to the land that was redistributed to it rightful owners.

DTA, if you have an issue with this , you should take it up with Denktash and co.

[B25]

Someone should remind/inform you that the British stripped the Ottomans of most of this stolen “Vakif” land by setting the record straight when in 1944 they passed the "Immovable Property Law” which returned the great majority of this stolen land back to the Greek Cypriots over successive counter-confiscations.

The legally of which as I understand is being challenged... Ps none of the Vakif land is stolen to say so show just how little you actually know about your fellow cypriots.

It's your pea-brain that is challenged...

The 1923 Treaty of Lausanne

ARTICLE 20.

Turkey hereby recognises the annexation of Cyprus proclaimed by the British Government on the sth November, 1914.

ARTICLE 2I .
Turkish nationals ordinarily resident in Cyprus on the 5th November, 1914, will acquire British nationality subject to the conditions laid down in the local law, and will thereupon lose their Turkish nationality. They will, however, have the right to opt for Turkish nationality within two years from the coming into force of the present Treaty, provided that they leave Cyprus within twelve months after having so opted.

Turkish nationals ordinarily resident in Cyprus on the coming into force of the present Treaty who, at that date, have acquired or are in process of acquiring British nationality in consequence of a request made in accordance with the local law, will also thereupon lose their Turkish nationality.
It is understood that the Government of Cyprus will be entitled to refuse British nationality to inhabitants of the island who, being Turkish nationals, had formerly acquired another nationality without the consent of the Turkish Government.

http://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Treaty_of_Lausanne

Now run along...

What the hell are you taking about who is talking about the treaty of lausanne? I am talking about the british taking land that didnt belong to them and giving it to the Greek cypriots.

Well who do you think owned it before the Ottomans came and took it. The only reason you and your sort have any land in Cyprus is for this very reason.

My god the audacity of you people.

The Italians had it and treated you GCs as surfs, did you not know this little bit of Cyprus history?

I see you show your true colours now you are not trying to buy land on the cheap.

And what colours would they be?? I think enough people here know what I stand for, I don't mince my words I say it as it is. And I still want the TC (o sorry did I say TCs, I menat to say TC)
land, if you have it to sell.

How is it on the cheap, you have no idea on what we (not me) were prepared to pay.

Any TCs out that wanting to sell up?? Come on down.

[DTA]

Someone should remind/inform you that the British stripped the Ottomans of most of this stolen “Vakif” land by setting the record straight when in 1944 they passed the "Immovable Property Law” which returned the great majority of this stolen land back to the Greek Cypriots over successive counter-confiscations.

The legally of which as I understand is being challenged... Ps none of the Vakif land is stolen to say so show just how little you actually know about your fellow cypriots.

Also do not forget, that the remaining "Vakif" land was sold by Denktash and Küçük for the sum of £1.5 million pounds around 1960, which the British have the receipt for the "Bill of Sale".!

Kiks, it wasn't sold to the British as such. The £1.5m that was paid was a form of compensation for community projects and re-housing of TC's.

This money went into Dentash and Kucuk personal accounts and very little was used for the purpose for which it was given.

I wonder what happened to the rest. By accepting this money they agreed to forfeit all rights to the land that was redistributed to it rightful owners.

DTA, if you have an issue with this , you should take it up with Denktash and co.

Dentas and co have no more right to give away this land, then the TRNC has giving away your property in the north. The vakif Foundation are the legal owners unless the uk done a deal with them, there has been no deal, and they are still the legal owners.

As the Orams case proved that the original legal owners have the right of the return of their land, therefore the the vakif land remains the property of the Vakif foundation.

[Get Real!]

...therefore the the vakif land remains the property of the Vakif foundation.

Keep making a fool of yourself because this is what's left of the "Vakif foundation" --->

[B25]

Someone should remind/inform you that the British stripped the Ottomans of most of this stolen “Vakif” land by setting the record straight when in 1944 they passed the "Immovable Property Law” which returned the great majority of this stolen land back to the Greek Cypriots over successive counter-confiscations.

The legally of which as I understand is being challenged... Ps none of the Vakif land is stolen to say so show just how little you actually know about your fellow cypriots.

Also do not forget, that the remaining "Vakif" land was sold by Denktash and Küçük for the sum of £1.5 million pounds around 1960, which the British have the receipt for the "Bill of Sale".!

Kiks, it wasn't sold to the British as such. The £1.5m that was paid was a form of compensation for community projects and re-housing of TC's.

This money went into Dentash and Kucuk personal accounts and very little was used for the purpose for which it was given.

I wonder what happened to the rest. By accepting this money they agreed to forfeit all rights to the land that was redistributed to it rightful owners.

DTA, if you have an issue with this , you should take it up with Denktash and co.

Dentas and co have no more right to give away this land, then the TRNC has giving away your property in the north. The vakif Foundation are the legal owners unless the uk done a deal with them, there has been no deal, and they are still the legal owners.

As the Orams case proved that the original legal owners have the right of the return of their land, therefore the the vakif land remains the property of the Vakif foundation.

Why don't you accept they took the money surrendered the land. It was within their power. Yu can hardly compare this to the orams whose land was forcibly siezed from its owner before being sold onto the orams.

Dream on DTA, you have no case, accept it.

[DTA]

Someone should remind/inform you that the British stripped the Ottomans of most of this stolen “Vakif” land by setting the record straight when in 1944 they passed the "Immovable Property Law” which returned the great majority of this stolen land back to the Greek Cypriots over successive counter-confiscations.

The legally of which as I understand is being challenged... Ps none of the Vakif land is stolen to say so show just how little you actually know about your fellow cypriots.

Also do not forget, that the remaining "Vakif" land was sold by Denktash and Küçük for the sum of £1.5 million pounds around 1960, which the British have the receipt for the "Bill of Sale".!

Kiks, it wasn't sold to the British as such. The £1.5m that was paid was a form of compensation for community projects and re-housing of TC's.

This money went into Dentash and Kucuk personal accounts and very little was used for the purpose for which it was given.

I wonder what happened to the rest. By accepting this money they agreed to forfeit all rights to the land that was redistributed to it rightful owners.

DTA, if you have an issue with this , you should take it up with Denktash and co.

Dentas and co have no more right to give away this land, then the TRNC has giving away your property in the north. The vakif Foundation are the legal owners unless the uk done a deal with them, there has been no deal, and they are still the legal owners.

As the Orams case proved that the original legal owners have the right of the return of their land, therefore the the vakif land remains the property of the Vakif foundation.

Why don't you accept they took the money surrendered the land. It was within their power. Yu can hardly compare this to the orams whose land was forcibly siezed from its owner before being sold onto the orams.

Dream on DTA, you have no case, accept it.

What's to accept, the fact of the matter is that IF Dentas accepted that money for the sale of vakif land, then he had no legal right to do so, it is like me trying to accept money for the sale your land.

If that is what happend then the courts will have no option but to rule in favor of the Vakif foundation because they are still the legal owners of the land.. Just like it the Orams case... unless of course foundation sold it... which I understand they didnt so the land is theirs

[bill cobbett]

Boys, here's an extract describing the 1946 Immovable Property (Tenure, Registration and Valuation) Law, inherited by the Republic in 1960.

It's the law that established the CY land registry system, and that gives legality to the kochans/associated cadastral maps. The only ownership is that recorded and updated by this system in lines of transfers of title back to 1946.

If Evkaf are recorded as owners, then they are the owners, if they ain't recorded, then they ain't.
-------------------

This law was enacted in 1946, replacing the Ottoman Land Law prevailing until then. It is considered to be A to Z of immovable property in Cyprus, dealing with all matters concerning the tenure, registration, disposition and valuation of immovable property, within the framework of the Land Registry system of Cyprus, which comprises all the works and means by which immovable property is technically defined and drawn, legally recognized, secured and financially valued.

The Land Registry system of Cyprus is unique, in that by its function the history of each piece of land is traced back to the date of the General Survey. The rights in land are defined and secured and all transactions relating to immovable property are safe and protected.

Cyprus is one of the 4 or 5 countries in the world which maintain such an accurate and effective Land Registry system. Moreover, with the completion of the computerization of all its services, it is expected that the services will not only be upgraded but also accelerated.

According to this law "immovable property" means:

(a) any land;
(b) buildings and other erections, structures or fixtures affixed to any land or to any building or other erection or structure;
(c ) trees, vines and any other thing whatsoever planted or growing upon any land and any produce thereof before severance;
(d) springs, wells, water and water rights whether held together with, or independently, of any land;
(e) privileges, liberties, easements and any other rights and advantages whatsoever appertaining or reputed to appertain to any land or to any building or other erection or structure;
(f) an undivided share in any property hereinbefore set out.
"Movable property" includes anything not constituting immovable property.

Section 40 of the law provides that ownership of immovable property or rights in immovable property can only be acquired by registration at the Land Registry, through the proper procedure described in the law and that such registration may only be effected by the registered owner of the property.
-----------------------------

[Oracle]

Dentas and co have no more right to give away this land, ...

He had every right. He was your leader. The fact he pocketed the money is for you to take up with him!

[DTA]

Dentas and co have no more right to give away this land, ...

He had every right. He was your leader. The fact he pocketed the money is for you to take up with him!

unless he was the leader of the vakif foundation he has NO right. The foundation is a separate legal entity and has no political ties.