SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application nos. 63972/09 and 34084/10
Siegfried RUDOLPH against Turkey
and Josefa RUDOLPH against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 17 October 2017 as a Committee composed of:
Julia Laffranque, President,
Jon Fridrik Kjølbro,
Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, judges,
and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on 20 November 2009 and 21 May 2010 respectively,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicants, Mr Siegfried Rudolph and Ms Josefa Rudolph, are German nationals, who were born in 1934 and 1931 respectively and lived in Eggenfelden. They were represented before the Court by Ms J. Ertürk, a lawyer practising in Ankara.
The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.
The applicants were individual small shareholders of Demirbank, a private bank in Turkey. By a decision of 6 December 2000, the Banking Regulation and Supervision Board (Bankacılık Düzenleme ve Denetleme Kurulu) decided to transfer the management and control of Demirbank to the Savings Deposit Insurance Fund (Tasarruf Mevduatı Sigorta Fonu). This decision was subsequently annulled by the national courts. Following this annulment, the applicants initiated compensation proceedings before the domestic courts. However they were not awarded any compensation. The applicants complained under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that they were illegally deprived of their shares in Demirbank and could not receive any compensation for their loss.
The applicants’ complaint in this regard was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits on 8 September 2016.
Following the communication of the case, by a letter of 5 October 2016, the applicants’ representative informed the Registry that the applicants, Mr Siegfried Rudolph and Ms Josefa Rudolph, had passed away on 18 September 2008 and 20 January 2010 respectively, and that their son and only heir, Mr Manfred Rudolph, intended to continue the proceedings before the Court.
THE LAW
Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.
The Court observes that, on 25 May 2010, Mr Manfred Rudolph lodged an application (no. 32888/10) with the Court on his own name and claimed a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention for his thirty six thousand and three hundred German share certificates in Demirbank. It further observes that these share certificates were the same as those which had been held by the applicants.
In the light of the foregoing, especially having regard to the facts that the applicants passed away and that their only heir, Mr Manfred Rudolph, has already lodged an application with the Court for the same subject matter as that at issue in the applicants’ cases, the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the case.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.
Done in English and notified in writing on 16 November 2017.
Hasan BakırcıJulia Laffranque
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy