Cyprus-Forum.com

[DT.]

You will find something more legible here: http://www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus-probl ... g/20100901

I would watch what the Cyprus Mail writes from now on, especially considering that one of the chief writers there recently had a Turkish addittion to their family.

[humanist]

The Barutçuzade Ahmet Vasıf Efendi Foundation has filed a legal case against the Greek Cypriot Ministry of Interior in relation to its property in South Cyprus.

The case was filed by the advocate of the Foundation Murat Metin Hakki at the Greek Cypriot District Court and the Foundation is demanding the payment of the cost of use of its property and the return of its right to have peaceful enjoyment of its own property.

The property in question is a 725 square meters of a historic building and a 950 square meters of parking lot in South Cyprus.
The foundation is demanding nearly two millions Euros in compensation for the use of their land since 1975 and 8,500 Euros per month until the property is handed over to it.

I wonder if the government counter sues for maintaining the property in good condition over the last 35 years

I support the move as much as I support any refugee suing for their rights in accessing their land in the occupied areas.

One rule for all. However, I would like the courts to ensure that the refugees who have thus far sued Turkey for denying them the right to their properties to have the compensation given to them asap without delay.

[Nikitas]

Presumably the GC equivalent of EVKAF, the Church, can sue for rent for all the churches that have been converted to profitable use by the TCs? Especially those that were exploited or sold with the blessings of the "authorities" like the church bought by some American bitch and turned into a private gallery? Granting her title is facilitation of the illegal conversion.

This is another case of typical Turkish cynicism, they take what they want and then exploit the system to reclaim what they insist they left behind and are no longer interestetd in. Bunch of crooks.

[vaughanwilliams]

The Barutçuzade Ahmet Vasıf Efendi Foundation has filed a legal case against the Greek Cypriot Ministry of Interior in relation to its property in South Cyprus.

The case was filed by the advocate of the Foundation Murat Metin Hakki at the Greek Cypriot District Court and the Foundation is demanding the payment of the cost of use of its property and the return of its right to have peaceful enjoyment of its own property.

The property in question is a 725 square meters of a historic building and a 950 square meters of parking lot in South Cyprus.
The foundation is demanding nearly two millions Euros in compensation for the use of their land since 1975 and 8,500 Euros per month until the property is handed over to it.

I wonder if the government counter sues for maintaining the property in good condition over the last 35 years

I support the move as much as I support any refugee suing for their rights in accessing their land in the occupied areas.

One rule for all. However, I would like the courts to ensure that the refugees who have thus far sued Turkey for denying them the right to their properties to have the compensation given to them asap without delay.

Depends on the terms of the lease. If it's a fully maintaining/repairing lease, the tenant is obliged to maintain the building at his cost to enable it to be returned to the landlord in the condition it was taken on in.

[revolver]

Where are all the democracy loving Greek Cypriots to support this case?

I am right here!

For as long as the illegal Turkish invader/occupier is holding 37% of sovereign Cypriot territory at gunpoint, and the so called “Turkish Cypriots” are aiding and abetting this foreign power from abiding by international law…

UN RESOLUTION 361 (1974)
http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr353.htm

UN RESOLUTION 541 (1983)
http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr541.htm

UN RESOLUTION 550 (1984)
http://www.un.int/cyprus/scr550.htm

…then it is laughable for criminals like this “foundation” to have any complaints!

CRIME AND PUNISHMENT . YOUR GOVERMENT WILL BE PAID OVER 2 MILLIONS TO THIS FOUNDATION. NO RUSH, YOU WILL SEE.
MONEY IS COMING FROM YOUR POCKET MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[revolver]

Presumably the GC equivalent of EVKAF, the Church, can sue for rent for all the churches that have been converted to profitable use by the TCs? Especially those that were exploited or sold with the blessings of the "authorities" like the church bought by some American bitch and turned into a private gallery? Granting her title is facilitation of the illegal conversion.

This is another case of typical Turkish cynicism, they take what they want and then exploit the system to reclaim what they insist they left behind and are no longer interestetd in. Bunch of crooks.

HEY PROF: Why don't you take look at that Nazire Sophie Case at last year.
Your goverment signed an agreement and accepted they were so harmless on TC's properties at the south.
I think you have all the rights to demand your properties in the north. no problem with that.
But, can't you be more fair and logical?
This is a property of TC's foundation and it is simply belongs to them, just like my shop in north nicosia belongs to Nigoli.
So, plase stripped of your racist thoughts be more logical so we can discuss.

[vaughanwilliams]

Presumably the GC equivalent of EVKAF, the Church, can sue for rent for all the churches that have been converted to profitable use by the TCs? Especially those that were exploited or sold with the blessings of the "authorities" like the church bought by some American bitch and turned into a private gallery? Granting her title is facilitation of the illegal conversion.

This is another case of typical Turkish cynicism, they take what they want and then exploit the system to reclaim what they insist they left behind and are no longer interestetd in. Bunch of crooks.

HEY PROF: Why don't you take look at that Nazire Sophie Case at last year.
Your goverment signed an agreement and accepted they were so harmless on TC's properties at the south.
I think you have all the rights to demand your properties in the north. no problem with that.
But, can't you be more fair and logical?
This is a property of TC's foundation and it is simply belongs to them, just like my shop in north nicosia belongs to Nigoli.
So, plase stripped of your racist thoughts be more logical so we can discuss.

Exactly. This is just a case of a landlord who is owed rent and a tenant who has ceased to pay rent. The fact that the landlord is in the North and the tenant is in the South is neither here nor there. No one, in this instance, was displaced or relocated in 1974, the tenant just stopped paying his rent. The fact that the tenant is an RoC government body is also irrelevant. A tenant is a tenant and rent due is rent owed.

[Kikapu]

Presumably the GC equivalent of EVKAF, the Church, can sue for rent for all the churches that have been converted to profitable use by the TCs? Especially those that were exploited or sold with the blessings of the "authorities" like the church bought by some American bitch and turned into a private gallery? Granting her title is facilitation of the illegal conversion.

This is another case of typical Turkish cynicism, they take what they want and then exploit the system to reclaim what they insist they left behind and are no longer interestetd in. Bunch of crooks.

HEY PROF: Why don't you take look at that Nazire Sophie Case at last year.
Your goverment signed an agreement and accepted they were so harmless on TC's properties at the south.
I think you have all the rights to demand your properties in the north. no problem with that.
But, can't you be more fair and logical?
This is a property of TC's foundation and it is simply belongs to them, just like my shop in north nicosia belongs to Nigoli.
So, plase stripped of your racist thoughts be more logical so we can discuss.

Exactly. This is just a case of a landlord who is owed rent and a tenant who has ceased to pay rent. The fact that the landlord is in the North and the tenant is in the South is neither here nor there. No one, in this instance, was displaced or relocated in 1974, the tenant just stopped paying his rent. The fact that the tenant is an RoC government body is also irrelevant. A tenant is a tenant and rent due is rent owed.

So when is Britain going to pay it's rent it owes since 1963 on the two bases to the RoC.??

[vaughanwilliams]

Presumably the GC equivalent of EVKAF, the Church, can sue for rent for all the churches that have been converted to profitable use by the TCs? Especially those that were exploited or sold with the blessings of the "authorities" like the church bought by some American bitch and turned into a private gallery? Granting her title is facilitation of the illegal conversion.

This is another case of typical Turkish cynicism, they take what they want and then exploit the system to reclaim what they insist they left behind and are no longer interestetd in. Bunch of crooks.

HEY PROF: Why don't you take look at that Nazire Sophie Case at last year.
Your goverment signed an agreement and accepted they were so harmless on TC's properties at the south.
I think you have all the rights to demand your properties in the north. no problem with that.
But, can't you be more fair and logical?
This is a property of TC's foundation and it is simply belongs to them, just like my shop in north nicosia belongs to Nigoli.
So, plase stripped of your racist thoughts be more logical so we can discuss.

Exactly. This is just a case of a landlord who is owed rent and a tenant who has ceased to pay rent. The fact that the landlord is in the North and the tenant is in the South is neither here nor there. No one, in this instance, was displaced or relocated in 1974, the tenant just stopped paying his rent. The fact that the tenant is an RoC government body is also irrelevant. A tenant is a tenant and rent due is rent owed.

So when is Britain going to pay it's rent it owes since 1963 on the two bases to the RoC.??

The question isn't "When is Britain going to pay?" but "When are you going to chase them for the rent?" Of course, if/when they pay, the TCs will need to be paid their share (1963 constitution and all that) and that will involve splitting the rent and paying some to the TRNC. Would you like to see Britain do that?

[Kikapu]

Presumably the GC equivalent of EVKAF, the Church, can sue for rent for all the churches that have been converted to profitable use by the TCs? Especially those that were exploited or sold with the blessings of the "authorities" like the church bought by some American bitch and turned into a private gallery? Granting her title is facilitation of the illegal conversion.

This is another case of typical Turkish cynicism, they take what they want and then exploit the system to reclaim what they insist they left behind and are no longer interestetd in. Bunch of crooks.

HEY PROF: Why don't you take look at that Nazire Sophie Case at last year.
Your goverment signed an agreement and accepted they were so harmless on TC's properties at the south.
I think you have all the rights to demand your properties in the north. no problem with that.
But, can't you be more fair and logical?
This is a property of TC's foundation and it is simply belongs to them, just like my shop in north nicosia belongs to Nigoli.
So, plase stripped of your racist thoughts be more logical so we can discuss.

Exactly. This is just a case of a landlord who is owed rent and a tenant who has ceased to pay rent. The fact that the landlord is in the North and the tenant is in the South is neither here nor there. No one, in this instance, was displaced or relocated in 1974, the tenant just stopped paying his rent. The fact that the tenant is an RoC government body is also irrelevant. A tenant is a tenant and rent due is rent owed.

So when is Britain going to pay it's rent it owes since 1963 on the two bases to the RoC.??

The question isn't "When is Britain going to pay?" but "When are you going to chase them for the rent?" Of course, if/when they pay, the TCs will need to be paid their share (1963 constitution and all that) and that will involve splitting the rent and paying some to the TRNC. Would you like to see Britain do that?

So what you are saying is, it's OK for Britain not to pay the rent she owes to the RoC and instead needs to be chased after to pay it, therefore you really do not stand by what you quoted here.

Exactly. This is just a case of a landlord who is owed rent and a tenant who has ceased to pay rent. The fact that the landlord is in the North and the tenant is in the South is neither here nor there. No one, in this instance, was displaced or relocated in 1974, the tenant just stopped paying his rent. The fact that the tenant is an RoC government body is also irrelevant. A tenant is a tenant and rent due is rent owed.

Britain owes the rent to the RoC and not to GCs, TCs or the "trnc", so stop confusing the issues here.!