Loizidou v. Turkey (just satisfaction)

Information Note on the Court’s case-law No.

July 1998

Loizidou v. Turkey (just satisfaction) - 15318/89

Judgment 28.7.1998 [GC]

Article 41

Costs and expenses

Non-pecuniary damage

Pecuniary damage

Claims for just satisfaction in respect of Court’s finding of violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1

[This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-Law Information Note summaries.]

I.ENTITLEMENT TO JUST SATISFACTION

Court’s finding in principal judgment that denial of access to property in northern Cyprus was imputable to Turkey is res judicata – applicant entitled to compensation.

Conclusion: respondent State’s claim dimissed (fifteen votes to two).

II.PECUNIARY DAMAGE

Given uncertainties inherent in assessing economic loss caused by denial of access, sum awarded on equitable basis.

Conclusion: respondent State to pay applicant specified sum (fourteen votes to three).

III.NON-PECUNIARY DAMAGE

Award made in respect of anguish, helplessness and frustration suffered by applicant.

Conclusion: respondent State to pay applicant specified sum (fifteen votes to two).

IV.APPLICANT’S COSTS AND EXPENSES

Awarded in full.

Conclusion: respondent State to pay applicant specified sum (thirteen votes to four).

© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights
This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.

Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes

 

Full & Egal Universal Law Academy