Published on 15 January 2024
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 62967/19
Ergün CEYLAN
against Türkiye
lodged on 26 November 2019
communicated on 18 December 2023
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the applicant’s refund request for the tuition fees he paid for the university his daughter had enrolled in, but which had been shut down pursuant to the state of emergency measures following the attempted coup of 15 July 2016. By a final decision of 11 October 2018, the administrative courts rejected the applicant’s case on the ground that the relevant administrative authority was still examining his request. On 22 July 2019 the Constitutional Court dismissed the applicant’s individual application.
The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the failure of the domestic courts to examine the merits of his claim, thus depriving him of his right of access to a court. He submits that his case eventually remained undetermined because of a manifest legal error committed by the domestic courts. He further complains under the same Article of the Convention about legal uncertainty resulting from the conflicting decisions delivered by the domestic courts in similar cases.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right of access to a court, guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, on account of the approach of the domestic courts in the interpretation of procedural rules for bringing an administrative action upon an implicit rejection (see Kutić v. Croatia, no. 48778/99, § 25, ECHR 2002-II; and Lupeni Greek Catholic Parish and Others v. Romania [GC], no. 76943/11, § 86, 29 November 2016)?
2. Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to a fair hearing, guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, on account of the conflicting case-law of the domestic courts (see Nejdet Şahin and Perihan Şahin v. Turkey [GC], no. 13279/05, §§ 49-58, 20 October 2011 and Lupeni Greek Catholic Parish and Others, cited above, § 116)?
The parties are invited to submit to the Court references to the relevant domestic judicial practice, where available.