Cyprus-Forum.com

[Sotos]

Decision in Orams case on invasion anniversary

EXCLUSIVE

By Philippos Stylianou

ON THE anniversary of the Turkish invasion this summer, the London High Court will deliver its final judgment on the controversial Orams case, which is expected to have an enormous effect on the future of Greek Cypriot refugee properties in the occupied areas.

Lawyer Constantis Candounas, who has asked the High Court to enforce a decision by a Cypriot court ordering David and Linda Orams from Hove, Sussex, to return land property to his client Meletis Apostolides, said the trial had been set for July 18, 19 and 20.

The action, under an EU regime making possible the enforcement of court decisions of one member state in the courts of another, was filed on December 21, 2005 and, besides being the first of its kind in the UK, it became even more controversial when the Orams retained the legal services of Cherie Blair QC, wife of the British Prime Minister.

Candounas told The Cyprus Weekly that he attended a hearing at the High Court with the Orams’ solicitors on March 1, 2006, during which the Court gave instructions for Apostolides’ expert witnesses to submit their evidence by March 29.

The Orams were to reply within a week, which they did, and then the lawyers of both sides were given two weeks to meet together.

Not easy

Called by The Cyprus Weekly to say if the date coinciding with the 32nd invasion anniversary carried any special significance, Candounas said it was very fortunate that they could get such an early date.

He explained that it was not easy to find a time slot suiting the lawyers of the two sides and the High Court judges.

Cherie Blair tried to get a postponement until Linda Orams’ appeal to the Cyprus Supreme Court against the ruling of the court of first instance was heard, but the High Court rejected this, as it could have taken as long as a year to 18 months.

Leading the UK legal team for Meletis Apostolides against Cherie Blair and other lawyers from the Matrix Chambers, will be Thomas Beazley QC, of Blackstone Chambers, with Simon Congdon of Holmans Fenwick Willan Solicitors and another QC from Brickstone Chambers.

Unaware

Linda and David Orams claimed they had bought Apostolides’ property in Lapithos, near Kyrenia, in good faith from a Turkish Cypriot without being aware of the legal and political implications and build a luxury villa there.

The Nicosia District Court ordered them to demolish the villa and return the property to its rightful owner. In the face of the Orams’ refusal to comply with the decision and being unable to enforce it because of the Turkish occupation in northern Cyprus, Apostolides can ask to have the judgment executed against the Orams’ UK property.

The British High Court will not review the merits of the case but will decide on matters of procedure and public policy.

The development has slowed down the arbitrary sale of Greek Cypriot refugee properties in the occupied territories, mainly to UK nationals, which had reached alarming proportions.

It would be no exaggeration to say that the High Court decision will seal the fate of the Greek Cypriot refugee properties either way.

Are UK courts affected by politics? Can we hope for justice?

[Agios Amvrosios]

I know that the UK courts are very protective of UK jurisdiction. This was one of the reasons EU members were originally reluctant to let the UK into the EU.

[cypezokyli]

Linda and David Orams claimed they had bought Apostolides’ property in Lapithos, near Kyrenia, in good faith from a Turkish Cypriot without being aware of the legal and political implications and build a luxury villa there.

it is interesting that they do not argue that what we did is not a crime
but
we didnot know....

i thought it would have been sth of the kind : you waged a war, now pay for it.



ofcource you can expect justice from english courts, and ofcource irrespective of the outcome you should expect another appeal, to some european court.

[lysi]

The ORAMS knew full well that the property they bought could be built on stolen greek land, they knew about the situation in cyprus but they were greedy, all they wanted was to profit from the occupation.

[rotate]

The ORAMS knew full well that the property they bought could be built on stolen greek land, they knew about the situation in cyprus but they were greedy, all they wanted was to profit from the occupation.

Once met a fellow countryman of mine at a party in the UK who had built a house in the North of Cyprus during the 1980's. Being a Ammochostos property looser in 74, I as you might imagine took a keen interest in his extolling the virtues of Northern Cyprus living.
He became quite agitated when I asked if he held title deed to the property and at one point when he was expounding upon his theory of Cypriot propaganda he became extremely aggresive.

Managed to calm him and he put up a fairly convincing argument to justify his actions. Whilst I had paid CYP18K for a flat in Larnaca at about the same time he had paid 'someone' GBP2K for enough land on which to build a 4 bedroomed house near Kyrenia. Cost of building was approx another GBP19K. He reckoned that there would never be a settlement and that the land would end up as his by default whatever the outcome of the Cyprus situation. And in any case he would receive compensation if he was forced to leave or in a worst case scenario he would have lived virtually rent free for a great number of years.

Could not argue with his math or his logic although with regard to his ethics or rather lack of them I could.

Now some twenty years later from the time that we both purchased on either side of the divide I hear from a mutual friend that the house in the North has been sold to a German couple for many times more than it cost to build whereas my Larnaca flat remains uninhabitable thanks to the actions of a bar owning RoC policeman and his Russian friends.

To say that I'm fairly pissed off would be putting it mildly. Greed it seems does pay and thats why I would also imagine so much of the RoC currency is stamped with the marks of the Northern Cyprus casinos, it cannot all have been returned to the RoC by T/C's travelling south or Perfideous Brits transferring there ill gotten gains. Northern Cyprus must now be the power house of the Turkish economy!

[Sotos]

it is interesting that they do not argue that what we did is not a crime
but
we didnot know....

People can say in forums that such actions are not a crime. But in court they can not say such thing. It is clearly a crime. So they try with the "we didn't know" approach.

[theresa]

Are there any legal implications for the sellers of the Greek owned properties? Or is it just the buyers?
Tess

[Svetlana]

Hi Theresa

The vendors are equally guilty, but it is only possible to enforce the finding of RoC Courts on owners of property within an EU country, like the Orams - who own a home in the UK.

If the people selling the land/property also owned land in an EU country, then yes they would be prosecuted, no doubt.

lana

[Kifeas]

Are there any legal implications for the sellers of the Greek owned properties? Or is it just the buyers?
Tess

Hello Theresa,
I would answer your question in the following way. For us who are the owners of properties in the occupied north, the one whose actions constitute an illegal deed, is the ones found to be living at the given moment in a house build in our property. They are the ones who commit the trespassing. For us it is almost irrelevant under which circumstances these people were found in the property, but rather only the fact that they constitute a trespass at the given moment. Any transaction acts, i.e. selling agreements, etc, in the face of our properties, do not by themselves constitute a direct offence, since they are null and void transactions anyway (by default,) because they are committed under the "rules" and "laws" of an illegal regime which we do not recognize, nor any other international body, organization or UN member state. Therefore, whether a "sales agreement" or a "sales transaction" took place before the property is trespassed, or not, makes little difference, in view of the actual violation, which is the fact of the trespass itself and which is committed by the person who is found to be living in the property, and not by the person that "sold" the property on false pretences. Perhaps (definitely,) those “selling” the properties (“vendors,”) also commit an illegality, by committing a fraud to sell property which they are not the owners by RoC and international law. However, the victims in this case are only the people who "buy" these properties in the face of false pretences, and not the G/C owners of the properties. In theory, a British person that buys such property from another person, has the right to take legal action against this other person that "sold" them the said property, for fraudulent behavior that resulted in damaging his ("buyer's") interests, and I believe they can also do it in RoC courts as well.

[nhowarth]

Hello Kifeas,

> those “selling” the properties (“vendors,”) also commit an illegality, by committing a fraud to sell property which they are not the owners

I've been led to believe that Cherie Blair's role is to advise the Orams how they may seek justice against the perpitrators of the fraud (with the objective of recovering their money). Have you heard anything about this?

Regards,