Sünkitay împotriva Turciei

Secțiunea a treia Cerere nr. 29909/96 prezentată de Argun SÜNKITAY împotriva Turciei Curtea Europeană a Drepturilor Omului (secțiunea a treia), care are loc la 12 iunie 2003 într-o cameră compusă din domnii Ress președinte Cabral Barreto Caflisch Türmen Zupančič H.S.

Greve Traja, judecători și grefier de secțiune Având în vedere cererea formulată anterior în fața Comisiei Europene pentru Drepturile Omului la 30 noiembrie 1995, având în vedere art. 5 alineatul (2) din Protocolul nr 11 la convenție, care a transferat Curții competența de a examina cererea, având în vedere observațiile prezentate de guvernul pârât și cele prezentate ca răspuns de solicitant, Având în vedere declarațiile oficiale de acceptare a unei soluții amiabile a cauzei, După ce a intenționat, face următoarea decizie în conformitate cu declarația reclamantului, Argun Sünk La 1 februarie 1994, reclamantul, în dezacord cu suma plătită, a introdus o acțiune în creștere a dreptului de proprietate la instanța de mare instanță din Ankara.

Prin hotărârea din 5 aprilie 1995, tribunalul i-a acordat recurentului o despăgubire suplimentară de 9 062 500 000 de lire turce (TRL). Această sumă era însoțită de dobânzi simple cu o rată legală de 30 % laan care urma să fie calculată de la data cedării terenului la În lipsa recursului din partea părților, hotărârea din 5 aprilie 1995 a devenit definitivă la 23 mai 1995. I notific that the Government of Turkey are pregred to pay the sum of 167,000 (one hundred and sasety-seven thousand) United States Dollars covering pecuniary and moraly damage and costs to me with a view to securiing a friendly settlement of application no. 29909/96 pandaning before the Court.

I also note that the payment of the sum will be paid in the following conditions: 83,500 (eighty-three thousand five hundred) US Dolars within three months from the data of delivery of the decision by the Court pursuant to the Article 37§ 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights and 83,500 (eighty-three thousand five hund) US Dolars within 6 months from the data of delivery of this decizie. I accept ofertal and waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of thefacts of this application. I declar that this constitutes a final settlement of the case. This declaration is made in the context of a friendly settlement which the Government and I have reached ... "I declare that the Government of Turkey offer to pay 83,500 (eighty-three thousand five hundred) United States Dollars to Mr Argun Sünk This sum shall be paid in US Dollars to a bank account named by the aplicant, free of any taxe and sarcini that may be aplicabily.

"I declare that the Government of Turkey offer to pay 83,500 (eighty-three thousand five hundred) United States Dollars to Mr Argun Sünk This sum shall be paid in US Dollars to a bank account named by the aplicant, free of any taxe and taxes that may be applicable. Curtea ia act de soluționarea pe cale amiabilă la care au ajuns părțile. Curtea consideră că acesta este implicat în respectarea drepturilor omului așa cum sunt recunoscute de Convenție sau de Protocoale și nu primește niciun motiv de ordine publică care să justifice continuarea examinării cererii [art. 37 alineatul (1) in fine] Prin aceste motive, Curtea, în unanimitate, decide să șteargă cererea de rol. Vincent Berger Georg Ress Moduler Președinte

TROISIÈME SECTION

DÉCISION Requête n o 29909/96 présentée par Argun SÜNKITAY contre la Turquie La Cour européenne des Droits de l’Homme (troisième section), siégeant le 12 juin 2003 en une chambre composée de : MM. G. Ress , président , I. Cabral Barreto , L. Caflisch , R. Türmen , B. Zupančič , M me H.S. Greve , M. K. Traja, juges , et de M. V. Berger, greffier de section , Vu la requête susmentionnée introduite devant la Commission européenne des Droits de l’Homme le 30 novembre 1995, Vu l’article 5 § 2 du Protocole n o 11 à la Convention, qui a transféré à la Cour la compétence pour examiner la requête, Vu les observations soumises par le gouvernement défendeur et celles présentées en réponse par le requérant, Vu les déclarations formelles d’acceptation d’un règlement amiable de l’affaire, Après en avoir délibéré, rend la décision suivante : EN FAIT Le requérant, Argun Sünkıtay, est un ressortissant turc, né en 1925 et résidant à Ankara.

Le 15 avril 1993, un terrain appartenant au requérant fut exproprié par la Direction générale des routes nationales ( Karayolları Genel Müdürlüğü ) pour la construction de la voie périphérique d’Ankara. Une indemnité d’expropriation fixée par une commission d’experts fut versée au requérant à la date d’expropriation. Le 1 er février 1994, le requérant, en désaccord avec le montant payé, introduisit un recours en augmentation de l’indemnité d’expropriation auprès du tribunal de grande instance d’Ankara. Par un jugement du 5 avril 1995, le tribunal donna gain de cause au requérant et lui accorda une indemnité complémentaire de 9 062 500 000 livres turques (TRL). Cette somme était assortie d’intérêts moratoires simples au taux légal de 30 % l’an à calculer à partir de la date de cession du terrain à l’Administration.

Faute de pourvoi de la part des parties, le jugement du 5 avril 1995 devint définitif le 23 mai 1995. L’indemnité complémentaire majorée d’un intérêt moratoire simple fut versée au requérant le 21 janvier 1998. Elles s’élevait à 15 115 177 000 TRL. EN DROIT Le 8 novembre 2001, la Cour a reçu du requérant la déclaration suivante, signée le 7 novembre 2001 : « I note that the Government of Turkey are prepared to pay the sum of 167,000 (one hundred and sixty-seven thousand) United States Dollars covering pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs to me with a view to securing a friendly settlement of application no. 29909/96 pending before the Court.

I also note that the payment of the sum will be paid in the following conditions: 83,500 (eighty-three thousand five hundred) US Dollars within three months from the date of delivery of the decision by the Court pursuant to the Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights and 83,500 (eighty-three thousand five hundred) US Dollars within six months from the date of delivery of this decision. I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of the facts of this application. I declare that this constitutes a final settlement of the case.

This declaration is made in the context of a friendly settlement which the Government and I have reached ... » Le 22 février 2002, le Gouvernement a fait parvenir deux déclarations, signées le 14 février 2002 : « I declare that the Government of Turkey offer to pay 83,500 (eighty-three thousand five hundred) United States Dollars to Mr Argun Sünkıtay corresponding to half of the sum agreed upon with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the application registered under no. 29909/96. This sum shall cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs, and it will be payable within three months from the date of delivery of the decision by the Court pursuant to the Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

This sum shall be paid in US Dollars to a bank account named by the applicant, free of any taxes and charges that may be applicable. » « I declare that the Government of Turkey offer to pay 83,500 (eighty-three thousand five hundred) United States Dollars to Mr Argun Sünkıtay corresponding to half of the sum agreed upon with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the application registered under no. 29909/96. This sum shall cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs, and it will be payable within six months from the date of delivery of the decision by the Court pursuant to the Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This sum shall be paid in US Dollars to a bank account named by the applicant, free of any taxes and charges that may be applicable.

This payment will constitute the final resolution of the case ... » La Cour prend acte du règlement amiable auquel sont parvenues les parties. Elle estime que celui-ci s’inspire du respect des droits de l’homme tels que les reconnaissent la Convention ou ses Protocoles et n’aperçoit par ailleurs aucun motif d’ordre public justifiant de poursuivre l’examen de la requête (article 37 § 1 in fine de la Convention). Par ces motifs, la Cour, à l’unanimité, Décide de rayer la requête du rôle. Vincent Berger Georg Ress Greffier Président