BUYING IMMOVABLES IN NORTHERN CYPRUS (TRNC)

FACTS:

The immovables that are situated in North Cyprus (Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus) may be classified under two groups;

1-      Turkish Land

2-      Greek Land

There are not any problems with regards to the Turkish Lands.

Our problem focuses on Greek Lands given to Turkish Cypriots.

After the war and declaration of TRNC, Greek Lands left in Northern Cyprus went under the control of TRNC Government.

Greek Lands were given to Turkish Cypriots who left their immovables in South Cyprus, Turkish and Turkish Cypriots who has participated in the war and Turkish immigrants from Turkey etc.

 There are three turning points with regards to Greek Lands.

Louzidou case:  

This case arising from the application of a Greek Cypriot was brought to ECHR by the Cyprus Government against Turkey for acting in breach of its obligations under the Convention. The alleged breach concerned Article 1 of Protocol No.1 which is the denial of access to property and Article 8 of the Convention that is unjustified interference with the right to respect for someone’s home. ECHR with its decision dated December 18^th 1996 held Turkey liable under these Articles.  Turkey was ordered to pay compensation.

This case formed the precedent of all the applications made by Greek Cypriots to ECHR and Turkey paid damages to the claimants.

Rather than a compensation for any purported expropriation of her property the claim of the claimant is thus confined to the loss of use of the land and the consequent lost opportunity to develop or lease it.

So one of the important results of these cases are that Greek Cypriots, who are the owner of the immovables situated in North Cyprus, are recognized by ECHR as the owners of their properties.

After this decision and especially the Xenides decision the Immovable Property Commission (IPC) was formed by TRNC under the new compensation law, Law 67/2005 that entered into force on December 22^nd 2005. This commission had the competence to decide on the restitution, exchange of properties or payment of compensation.   

A recent and another important case concerning the Greek properties and cases in ECHR is Demopoulos case.  

Demopoulos Case:

Within this case ECHR decided that, the IPC procedure may be regarded as a “domestic remedy” of the respondent State. ECHR has stated within its decision that “The Court finds that Law 67/2005 provides an accessible and effective framework of redress in respect of complaints about interference with the property owned by Greek Cypriots. The applicant property owners in the present cases have not made use of this mechanism and their complaints under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention must therefore be rejected for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies. It is satisfied that Law 67/2005 makes realistic provision for redress in the current situation of occupation that is beyond this Court's competence to resolve.“

As can be seen from the statement above ECHR has recognized the remedies given by the IPC.

The importance of this decision is that when compensation is paid to a Greek Cypriot that property may be deemed as expropriated by TRNC. And within practice and from the prior decisions of ECHR it is observed that where a Greek Land is given by TRNC to a new owner in such circumstances IPC awards compensation or exchange of properties (that are not owned personally) rather than restitution.

Where a person owns a Greek Land situated in North Cyprus and IPC pays compensation or provides other remedies for it then there cannot be further claims with regards to that property.

An example where a case is struck off by the ECHR after applicant accepted an offer of 1 million dollars and exchange of property put forward by the IPC is Eugenia Michaelidou Developments Ltd and Michael Tymvios v. Turkey.

Apostolides v. Orams:

Apart from these two cases heard by ECHR, another Greek Cypriot (Apostolides) has used another procedure. In this case, Apostolides and his family initiated legal proceedings in Republic of Cyprus (South Cyprus) claiming their properties then applied for recognition and enforcement of the decision taken by the Cypriot Courts.  The matter went all the way to the ECJ and ECJ has decided for the enforcement of the decision.

This case has a big impact on European Citizens owning Greek Land in North Cyprus as it may mean that such decision may be enforced against them in their home countries and they may be liable to pay compensation.But it was decided before the Demopoulos case so ( if any ) what effects of that judgment would have on new cases following a similar procedure as Orams case are unknown.

Today, immovable properties weather Greek or Turkish Land in TRNC do not possess any risks as to their ownership and can be freely purchased. That is because immovable properties of Greek Cypriots in TRNC will either be legally acquired by the TRNC government upon the payment of compensation (or by any other remedy provided) to its Greek owner by the IPC or the dispute with regards to such immovables will end upon the final solution of the Cyprus problem.    

But one should always seek independent legal advise while purchasing immovable properties. There may be other risks on the title of the immovable properties which are required to be examined legally.