Cyprus-Forum.com

[Lordo]

no body said they will forget their properties, they will claim loss of use and sell their property to the current owner. in most cases as most of the land in the south is owned by trnc then it is the trnc which will exchange. as far as the company is concerned it is also the same for people who are not on the original deeds and were younger than 14 in 1974. you know very well this is has never been a a legal issue and will never be.

wake up boys the time to be able to do that will come to an end. 4000 people have already applied. you know it makes sense.

Less than 10% resolved!

when the time runs out and they have not applied they only have themselves to blame. and guess what nothing will give the terks more pleasure to see them not apply. they will be giving it away for free.

[Lordo]

no body said they will forget their properties, they will claim loss of use and sell their property to the current owner. in most cases as most of the land in the south is owned by trnc then it is the trnc which will exchange. as far as the company is concerned it is also the same for people who are not on the original deeds and were younger than 14 in 1974. you know very well this is has never been a a legal issue and will never be.

wake up boys the time to be able to do that will come to an end. 4000 people have already applied. you know it makes sense.

Less than 10% resolved!

And 10% has taken 7 years, so how long will applicant number 4001 have to wait?

you must be blind not to see first of all the consequences of delaying the agreement 50 years and now the applications beyond the date it can be applied. you will face the consequences when it closes. and the terks will laugh all the way to the bank. terkish bank that is.

[DT.]

Nothing to say? I thought this would have been given a bit of "air time


http://www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus/echr- ... s/20130504

Aren't you stretching the truth a little (actually a lot) Paaul 12? Of course, you got illiterate VP taking the bait and falls into your trap.

Where is the actual ECHR ruling on this? According to the article, the case was dismissed on technicality reasons. What's new? All the rest of the article are the supposition of the claimant (Meleagrou) and not the facts of the ruling by the ECHR. Personally, even if this ruling was made on the grounds that a property belonging to a company cannot be transferred to an individual to make the claim for the land on their own behalf, this has nothing to do with property belonging to individuals in 1974 or their heirs which must be 99% of all the cases.

First stop is the IPC TRNC.

Just to remind you, Turkey was ruled by the ECHR as responsbible for the loss of property of these people. The IPC is a legitimate committee belonging to the State of Turkey. It has nothing to do with the occupied territopries other than its location for practical reasons.

[bill cobbett]

A massive game-changer comes in to force in eighteen months time that will make the ECHR and IPC redundant for many refugees.

Be patient friends and in the meantime be wary of the IPC and ECHR. The IPC is as much the ECHR's baby as it's Turkey's and it will do all it can to protect its bastard baby.

If any friend wants details pm BillC.

[Lordo]

A massive game-changer comes in to force in eighteen months time that will make the ECHR and IPC redundant for many refugees.

Be patient friends and in the meantime be wary of the IPC and ECHR. The IPC is as much the ECHR's baby as it's Turkey's and it will do all it can to protect its bastard baby.

If any friend wants details pm BillC.

it certainly will be charluimu they will find that the window for claiming their property has finished. they can then turn on the likes of you for the advice not to apply.