CEDH, Cour (Deuxième Section Comité), ÖZTURAN AND OTHERS v. TURKEY, 26 mai 2020, 68103/11, 73774/14, 73793/14, 74076/14, 74194/14, …

SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 68103/11 Refik ÖZTURAN against Turkey and 35 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 26 May 2020 as a Committee composed of: Valeriu Griţco, President, Arnfinn Bårdsen, Peeter Roosma, judges, and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

1. The details of the applicants as well the names of their respective representatives are set out in the appendix. 2. The Turkish Government ("the Government") were represented by their Agent. The circumstances of the case 3. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 4. The applicants' lands were expropriated by the administration according to the Expropriation Act (Law no. 2942). 5. The Civil Courts decided to register the lands in question in the administration's name in the land register and determined the amounts of compensation for expropriation. The domestic courts also ordered the parties to pay each other's legal fees (avukatlık vekalet ücreti). Relevant domestic law and practice 6. The domestic legislation regarding the expropriation procedure and the costs and expenses may be found in Musa Tarhan v. Turkey (no. 12055/17, §§ 31-40, 23 October 2018). 7. Following the Court's judgment in Musa Tarhan (cited above) the Turkish Constitutional Court reviewed its practice and followed the Court's approach with regard to the legal fees (see the Turkish Constitutional Court's judgment in the case of Sadettin Ekiz, no. 2016/9364, 9 May 2019). 8. Meanwhile, the Court of Cassation's General Assembly of Civil Divisions (Yargıtay Hukuk Genel Kurulu) adopted a similar approach (no. 2019/241E., 2019/560K., 14 May 2019). 9. As regards the depreciation of the compensation due to the inflation, in its Ali Şimşek and others (2014/2073, 6 July 2017) and Cevat Aydın (no. 2014/13886, 4 October 2017) judgments, the Turkish Constitutional Court reviewed its practice by following the Court's approach in the case of Dökmeci v. Turkey (no. 74155/14, 6 December 2016). COMPLAINTS 10. The applicants complained under Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention about the domestic courts' decisions, obliging them to pay a lump sum to the opposing party in respect of lawyer's fees and/or about the fact that no interest had been applied to the amount awarded by the domestic courts.

THE LAW

11. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. 12. The applicants complained about the judicial practice, in the context of expropriation proceedings, to order both parties to pay a lump sum to the opposing party in respect of lawyer fees and/or about the depreciation of the expropriation compensation due to the high inflation rates. 13. The Court notes that it has already examined similar complaints in the case of Şahiner v. Turkey ((dec.), no. 42166/15, 11 February 2020) and declared the application inadmissible. The Court reiterates that a total loss below 5% does not constitute an excessive burden upsetting the fair balance to be struck between the general interest of the community and the fundamental rights of the individual (ibid, § 23). The Court sees no reason to adopt a different approach in the present cases. In view of the above, the Court concludes that these complaints are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons

, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 25 June 2020. Hasan Bakırcı Valeriu Griţco Deputy Registrar President Appendix No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1 68103/11 Özturan v. Turkey 25/08/2011 Refik ÖZTURAN 1946 Antalya Turkish Ahmet GÜREL 2 73774/14 Koraş v. Turkey 13/11/2014 Murat KORAŞ 1954 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 3 73793/14 Özçelik v. Turkey 13/11/2014 Ayse ÖZÇELİK 1940 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 4 74076/14 Topak v. Turkey 20/11/2014 Mustafa TOPAK 1960 Antalya Turkish Adil AKTAY 5 74194/14 Keskin v. Turkey 20/11/2014 Mehmet KESKİN 1956 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 6 74281/14 Göker v. Turkey 20/11/2014 Durdane GÖKER 1973 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 7 74304/14 Çetiner and Others v. Turkey 13/11/2014 Gülşen ÇETİNER 1962 Karaman Turkish Hüseyin GÖKSU 1960 Mersin Turkish Mümün GÖKSU 1964 Mersin Turkish Havva GÖKSU 1935 Karaman Turkish Sıttıka BOZCU 1954 Karaman Turkish Mehmet GÖKSU 1969 Karaman Turkish Hikmet GÖKSU 1969 Mersin Turkish Adil AKTAY 8 75561/14 Sözen v. Turkey 29/11/2014 Salim SÖZEN 1968 Konya Turkish Adil AKTAY 9 77066/14 Yiğit v. Turkey 05/12/2014 Kezziban YIĞIT 1955 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 10 77437/14 Davranan v. Turkey 09/12/2014 Ali DAVRANAN 1962 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 11 78570/14 Toprak v. Turkey 11/12/2014 Mustafa TOPRAK 1960 Antalya Turkish Adil AKTAY 12 945/15 Koraş v. Turkey 31/12/2014 Sultan KORAŞ 1959 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 13 12878/15 Gürbüz v. Turkey 09/03/2015 Şerife GÜRBÜZ 1934 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 14 13124/15 Yıldırım v. Turkey 09/03/2015 Adil YILDIRIM 1955 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 15 18641/15 Aktepe v. Turkey 15/04/2015 Fatma AKTEPE 1945 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 16 18745/15 Sözen v. Turkey 15/04/2015 Muhsin SÖZEN 1958 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 17 20948/15 Karpuz v. Turkey 25/04/2015 Huseyin KARPUZ 1954 Konya Turkish Adil AKTAY 18 21017/15 Göksu v. Turkey 25/04/2015 Mehmet GÖKSU 1931 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 19 22949/15 Kul v. Turkey 04/05/2015 Mustafa KUL 1953 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 20 26258/15 Bozcu v. Turkey 20/05/2015 Mitat BOZCU 1956 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 21 26401/15 Doğan v. Turkey 20/05/2015 Ali DOĞAN 1958 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 22 26732/15 Bozdemir and Ayan v. Turkey 20/05/2015 İlyas BOZDEMİR 1984 Karaman Turkish Şerife BOZDEMİR 1965 Karaman Turkish Ramazan BOZDEMİR 1985 Karaman Turkish Zeliha AYAN 1993 Konya Turkish Adil AKTAY 23 26781/15 Toksoy v. Turkey 20/05/2015 Erkan TOKSOY 1970 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 24 27217/15 Asar v. Turkey 01/06/2015 Mehmet ASAR 1944 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 25 27249/15 Bardak v. Turkey 01/06/2015 Ahmet BARDAK 1934 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 26 27254/15 Ay v. Turkey 01/06/2015 Ali AY 1984 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 27 27818/15 Yıldırım v. Turkey 01/06/2015 Adil YILDIRIM 1955 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 28 30764/15 Özçelik v. Turkey 10/06/2015 Birol ÖZÇELİK 1973 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 29 30765/15 Seyrandibi v. Turkey 10/06/2015 Hasan SEYRANDİBİ 1977 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 30 31628/15 Sözen v. Turkey 17/06/2015 Havva SÖZEN 1929 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 31 32250/15 Aktepe v. Turkey 17/06/2015 Nuray AKTEPE 1960 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 32 32254/15 Varlı v. Turkey 17/06/2015 Ali Rıza VARLI 1932 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 33 34921/15 Varlı v. Turkey 11/07/2015 Hamit VARLI 1937 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 34 40529/15 Koçaş v. Turkey 03/08/2015 Sevim KOÇAŞ 1952 Karaman Turkish Utku Çağrı AKTAY 35 48489/15 Oflaz v. Turkey 17/09/2015 Fatma OFLAZ 1950 Karaman Turkish Adil AKTAY 36 62670/15 Albayrak and Others v. Turkey 15/12/2015 Nurettin ALBAYRAK 1964 Karaman Turkish Gülbahar DEMİREL 1976 Karaman Turkish Gülüzar TOPTAŞ 1966 Karaman Turkish Cengiz ALBAYRAK 1973 Karaman Turkish Ali ALBAYRAK 1979 Karaman Turkish Eşşe ALBAYRAK Karaman Turkish Utku Çağrı AKTAY