bill cobbett wrote:The Convention allows derogations on grounds of national interest in some of the Articles, including Article 1 of the First Protocol (the Property Article) but there may be no need to go that far...
Question... Was CY a party in the Tymvos case before the ECHR or in the friendly agreement????
Article 46 is the article that binds all High Contracting Parties (member states of the CoE) to abide by all ECHR rulings to which they are a party.
Suspect CY was not a party, in which case Article 46 does not apply.
If Tymvos takes the RoC to the ECHR on the basis that the RoC, by refusing to recognise his ownership of the land in the south granted to him via an IPC settlement, is infringing his right to property. THis is what it is reported he is now doing.
In this case the RoC will be a contracting party. The RoC will no doubt argue that their refusal to recongise his ownership is in the 'public interest' (not national btw, but public, I think the differences is subtle but relevant). No doubt they will make other arguments as well. The ECHR will decide if this is a valid reason to deny him his rights to this property or not. If they do decide it is not, then the RoC will be required to change national law so no one elses rights are vilated in a similar way.