Cyprus-Forum.com

[cypezokyli]

VP is right about what the court is about to decide. but imo any decision will influence the market. i dont think, anyone will check what exactly the court has decided. it can and will be used as propaganda by the side it will win.

[theresa]

All I know is that the GC legal team called for an adjournment and were refused. As far as I can tell the case will go ahead on the scheduled dates. This outcome will certainly be an eye opener in regards whether individual prosecutions will be tolerated rather a blanket " settlement after solution" wont it? If I find any more out I will let you all know!
Tess

[Viewpoint]

I don't think so VP...What ever the decision will be, there will be appeals and then move on to the EU courts...There will be no short time solution...with appeals pending this will stop the selling because more will join the orams in these courts...Can you imagine if more people are sued?

Do you think it will be worth investing in North Cyprus if you could be sued at a drop of a hat?...what kind of life would that be?

Dont count your chickens before they hatch....I agree that there maybe no short term solution will be fıund but even referral to ECHR will not put off potential buyers as the issue of whether their properties in the UK can legally be sieized is more important to british buyers. If this is not enforced it will be deemed a victory for the north and buyers will increase as they do not see us Cypriots as ever finding a solution to the overall issue which I have to agree with judging on the amount of negativity on this forum and coming from each side of the divide..

[miltiades]

Viewpoint , please act logically . Papadopoulos is a lawyer and the President of Cyprus .Would his office represent the Orams , look there are principles involved here.
Mrs Bush would not represent Osama , if she was a lawyer , Mr Talat would not defend a G/C claiming his land back. You must see the connection here , a political matter defended by the British Prime Ministers wife is inappropriate.
This is what you state :
"""you that is attaching so much importance to her being married to the British PM, I'm sure the English judicial system will accept her as just another lawyer arguing her clients viewpoint and trying to win.

Laura Bush can represent the devil if that is what she wishes to do, she should have the freedom to do so just like anyone else and not be discriminated against just because of who she is married to. ""

[Viewpoint]

All I know is that the GC legal team called for an adjournment and were refused. As far as I can tell the case will go ahead on the scheduled dates. This outcome will certainly be an eye opener in regards whether individual prosecutions will be tolerated rather a blanket " settlement after solution" wont it? If I find any more out I will let you all know!
Tess

Thanks Tess.

[Kifeas]

double post.

[Kifeas]

The most certain thing that will happen should the British high court rules out the adoption of the RoC court ruling against Orams is for the RoC to take the UK to the EU European communities’ court.

There is no way such a loophole will be allowed, which virtually will give a free ride to the TCs and Turkey to illegally gradually sell all our properties in the occupied north, and hope that this issue will be addresses under a comprehensive political solution. If they think in the north that they will continue to bring about more and more illegal and illegitimate fait accomplices on the ground, and hope that there will be a way in the future to legalise them through a political solution agreement, they are delluding themselves. One of the most basic and essential ingredients that a political solution should provide for the GC side is the right of return and the right to their properties of the maximum possible number of GC refugees. If this aspect will become unfeasible as a result of the TC and Turkish illegal practices visa vie the GC properties in the north, then there will be absolutely no meaning to any agreed solution whatsoever, and the outcome will not be a recognised partition but rather that (a) Turkey will never cross the door of the UK, and (b) future peace in this country will be put on a permanent danger of being destroyed, and for all these the TC leadership will be the sole responsible and guilty party.

The only thing that the TC and the Turkish side have to exchange in the equation of a political solution is the establishment of the right of return and the right to a re-instatement of our properties in the currently occupied north. Nothing else! All the rest in the equation will be provided by the G/C side. If the TC and the Turkish side utilise and waste what they now (illegally) hold (as a hostage) and will have to exchange for the sake of a solution, then there will be nothing left for them to trade at the negotiating table, and therefore there will be no motive and incentive for the G/C side to enter into an agreement on the basis of BBF, if it will be the side that will be doing all the giving -without anything to gain back in return.

This is also something the British government should know very well, if they are serious and honest in their claims that they support a re-unification solution in Cyprus on the basis of a BBF.

[Viewpoint]

Viewpoint , please act logically . Papadopoulos is a lawyer and the President of Cyprus .Would his office represent the Orams , look there are principles involved here.
Mrs Bush would not represent Osama , if she was a lawyer , Mr Talat would not defend a G/C claiming his land back. You must see the connection here , a political matter defended by the British Prime Ministers wife is inappropriate.
This is what you state :
"""you that is attaching so much importance to her being married to the British PM, I'm sure the English judicial system will accept her as just another lawyer arguing her clients viewpoint and trying to win.

Laura Bush can represent the devil if that is what she wishes to do, she should have the freedom to do so just like anyone else and not be discriminated against just because of who she is married to. ""

The simple question is does she have the right to take on this case? whether she does take it on is down to her not anyone else thats what Im arguing.

In your example if your leader or ours want to take on such cases they should have the right to do so whether they do or not should be their choice, you cannot restrict someone on the fact they are married to a certain individual.

[boomerang]

I don't think so VP...What ever the decision will be, there will be appeals and then move on to the EU courts...There will be no short time solution...with appeals pending this will stop the selling because more will join the orams in these courts...Can you imagine if more people are sued?

Do you think it will be worth investing in North Cyprus if you could be sued at a drop of a hat?...what kind of life would that be?

Dont count your chickens before they hatch....I agree that there maybe no short term solution will be fıund but even referral to ECHR will not put off potential buyers as the issue of whether their properties in the UK can legally be sieized is more important to british buyers. If this is not enforced it will be deemed a victory for the north and buyers will increase as they do not see us Cypriots as ever finding a solution to the overall issue which I have to agree with judging on the amount of negativity on this forum and coming from each side of the divide..

VP I ain't counting any chooks...The point as we agree on is there will be no quick solution...just point scoring, as usual...

But the effect will be, maybe not a stop, but a severe reduction in the sales of these properties because of the uncertain future...

Just think who buys property in the North and for what reason...retirees so they can live their remaining natural life in peace and quite...The last thing they want is to have headaches...It would be better for them to invest in West Turkey...with no headaches...

[Kikapu]

Generally speaking, a judgement from one country can be transfered to another. I don't know how much the GC's that owened the property that the Orams built a house on was awarded, but in reality, it shouldn't be more than what the Orams paid for, for the land, and that judgement should have been against the person who sold it, and not the buyer. Were the Orams in court , in Nicosia to defend themselves, and if they were, how on earth would they have gotten a fair trial with or without a jury. So the British courts may just rule that the Orams judgement against them is not up to the standards for fair trial and that the judgement is not recognized , or at worse case senario, they will have to pay only for the land that they have bought, and that could be what ever it was worth from 1974 until the time it was bought, and keep the house built on intact. If the Orams went through all the channels in the TRNC to purchase the property, then the seller should bare all the responsibility.