SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 7463/09
Mustafa Şevket TARI and others against Turkey
and 12 other applications
(see list appended)
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 1 October 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Peer Lorenzen, President,
András Sajó,
Nebojša Vučinić, judges,
and Seçkin Erel, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications, listed in the Appendix,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
A list of the applicants is set out in the Appendix. Additionally, the case and decision numbers of the impugned proceedings appear in the Appendix.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.
On various dates, the applicants initiated actions before various civil courts or civil proceedings were brought against them before the civil courts. Certain procedures lasted several years, however some proceedings are still pending before the domestic courts.
B. Relevant domestic law
A description of the relevant domestic law may be found in Müdür Turgut and Others ((dec.), no. 4860/09, §§ 19-26, 26 March 2013).
COMPLAINTS
The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the proceedings before the national courts had not been concluded within a reasonable time.
Certain applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 and 17 of the Convention about the outcome of the proceedings.
Certain applicants also alleged violations of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.
THE LAW
I. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS
The Court first considers that in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court, the applications should be joined, given their common legal background.
II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE LENGTH OF THE PROCEEDINGS
The applicants complained that the length of the proceedings had been incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement, laid down in Article 6§ 1 of the Convention, which reads as follows:
“In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ..., everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by a ... tribunal...”
The Court observes that the applicants asserted that the length of the proceedings had been incompatible with the principle of the “reasonable time” requirement in accordance with Article 6§ 1 of the Convention. The Court found in Müdür Turgut and Others (cited above, §§ 58 and 60) that the Compensation Commission established by Law no. 6384, insofar as it is a priori accessible and capable of offering reasonable prospects of redress for complaints concerning the length of proceedings, constituted a remedy which applicants were required to exhaust for the purposes of Article 35 § 1 of the Convention. Accordingly, the applicants should avail themselves of the new remedy offered by Law no. 6384.
It follows that these complaints must be rejected under Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies.
III. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE CONVENTION
A. Article 6 § 1 and 17 of the Convention
Certain applicants also complained under Article 6 § 1 about the outcome and the alleged unfairness of the proceedings. In so far as this complaint may be understood to concern the assessment of the evidence and the result of the proceedings before the domestic courts, the Court reiterates that, according to Article 19 of the Convention, its duty is to ensure the observance of the engagements undertaken by the Contracting Parties to the Convention. In particular, it is not its function to deal with errors of fact or law allegedly committed by a national court unless and in so far as they may have infringed rights and freedoms protected by the Convention. Moreover, while Article 6 of the Convention guarantees the right to a fair hearing, it does not lay down any rules on the admissibility of evidence or the way it should be assessed, which are therefore primarily matters for regulation by national law and the national courts (see García Ruiz v. Spain [GC], no. 30544/96, § 28, ECHR 1999‑I). In the present case, the Court is satisfied that the applicants’ submissions do not disclose any appearance that the courts lacked impartiality, or that the proceedings were otherwise unfair or arbitrary.
It follows that these complaints must be declared inadmissible as being manifestly ill-founded, pursuant to Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.
B. Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention
Having carefully examined certain applicants’ complaints in the light of all the material in its possession, and in so far as the matter complained of is within its competence, the Court finds that it does not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or its Protocols.
It follows that these parts of the applications 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.
Seçkin ErelPeer Lorenzen
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
Appendix
No
Application No
Lodged on
Applicant
Date of birth
Place of residence
Represented by
Notes
7463/09
02/02/2009
Mustafa Şevket TARI
01/01/1930
Istanbul
Ahmet Erbil YOLAY
Istanbul
Ayten DELİORMAN
Istanbul
Hüseyin TARI
Istanbul
Nurşen YOLAY
Istanbul
Ömür YOLAY
Istanbul
Özlem YOLAY
Istanbul
Yücel ÇAKIR
Istanbul
Eda GÜNLÜCE
Muğla
Gülten SARAK TARI (KANYALI)
Istanbul
Rahmi AKYÜREK
Court of Cassation,
E: 2008/2913,
K: 2008/3351.
16599/10
10/03/2010
Zeyni KAYHAN
10/02/1950
Istanbul
Abidin KAYHAN
Istanbul
Nurhayat AYDIN KAYHAN
10/08/1964
Mardin
Türkiye YILDIZ
09/02/1933
Mardin
Fikret KAYHAN
04/04/1965
Istanbul
Mehmet Şirin AYDIN
05/03/1936
Mardin
Eyyüp Sabır AYDIN
06/11/1981
Nevşehir
Abdulhalim AYDIN
19/12/1947
Istanbul
Güla Dicle AYDIN
28/11/1974
Mardin
Nadire AYDIN
01/09/1940
Mardin
Yılmaz FİDAN
Kızıltepe Cadastral Court, E: 1971/4, K: 1989/24
16684/10
10/03/2010
Zeyni KAYHAN
10/02/1950
Istanbul
Abidin KAYHAN
Istanbul
Nurhayat AYDIN KAYHAN
10/08/1964
Mardin
Türkiye YILDIZ
09/02/1933
Mardin
Fikret KAYHAN
04/04/1965
Istanbul
Mehmet Şirin AYDIN
05/03/1936
Mardin
Eyyüp Sabır AYDIN
06/11/1981
Nevşehir
Abdulhalim AYDIN
19/12/1947
Istanbul
Güla Dicle AYDIN
28/11/1974
Mardin
Nadire AYDIN
01/09/1940
Mardin
Yılmaz FİDAN
Kızıltepe Cadastral Court, E: 1978/2.
16689/10
10/03/2010
Zeyni KAYHAN
10/02/1950
Istanbul
Abidin KAYHAN
Istanbul
Nurhayat AYDIN KAYHAN
10/08/1964
Mardin
Türkiye YILDIZ
09/02/1933
Mardin
Fikret KAYHAN
04/04/1965
Istanbul
Mehmet Şirin AYDIN
05/03/1936
Mardin
Eyyüp Sabır AYDIN
06/11/1981
Nevşehir
Abdulhalim AYDIN
19/12/1947
Istanbul
Güla Dicle AYDIN
28/11/1974
Mardin
Nadire AYDIN
01/09/1940
Mardin
Yılmaz FİDAN
Court of Cassation,
E: 2006/2587, K: 2006/3479.
35872/10
13/05/2010
Abdulhalim AYDIN
19/12/1947
Istanbul
Zeyni KAYHAN
10/02/1950
Istanbul
Nurhayat AYDIN KAYHAN
10/08/1964
Mardin
Türkiye YILDIZ
09/02/1933
Mardin
Fikret KAYHAN
04/04/1965
Istanbul
Mehmet Şirin AYDIN
05/03/1936
Mardin
Eyyüp Sabır AYDIN
06/11/1981
Nevşehir
Güla Dicle AYDIN
28/11/1974
Mardin
Nadire AYDIN
01/09/1940
Mardin
Yılmaz FİDAN
Kızıltepe Cadastral Court, E: 1965/295
59553/10
07/09/2010
Ali KARAASLAN
11/05/1967
Mardin
Hasine AKKOYUN
01/10/1950
Mardin
Azize KARAASLAN
01/02/1939
Mardin
Ayten KARAASLAN
05/05/1979
Mardin
Asya OKTAY
01/02/1949
Mardin
Abdülmecit ERTAŞ
01/01/1949
Mardin
Abas KARAASLAN
10/03/1940
Mardin
Zerga İLHAN
01/01/1955
Mardin
Reşit KARAASLAN
23/11/1975
Mardin
Hüseyin KARAASLAN
03/01/1965
Mardin
Hacci ERTAŞ
01/02/1940
Mardin
Hasan KARAASLAN
05/04/1963
Mardin
Güle DEMİR
24/05/1973
Mardin
Güli DOĞAN
10/07/1941
Mardin
Gamra TARHAN
01/01/1962
Mardin
Yılmaz FİDAN
Kızıltepe Cadastral Court, E: 1966/194, K: 2010/3
60270/10
20/09/2010
Zerga İLHAN
01/01/1955
Mardin
Ali KARAASLAN
11/05/1967
Mardin
Hasine AKKOYUN
01/10/1950
Mardin
Azize KARAASLAN
01/02/1939
Mardin
Ayten KARAASLAN
05/05/1979
Mardin
Asya OKTAY
01/02/1949
Mardin
Abdülmecit ERTAŞ
01/01/1949
Mardin
Abas KARAASLAN
10/03/1940
Mardin
Reşit KARAASLAN
23/11/1975
Mardin
Hüseyin KARAASLAN
03/01/1965
Mardin
Hacci ERTAŞ
01/02/1940
Mardin
Hasan KARAASLAN
05/04/1963
Mardin
Güle DEMİR
24/05/1973
Mardin
Güli DOĞAN
10/07/1941
Mardin
Gamra TARHAN
01/01/1962
Mardin
Yılmaz FİDAN
Kızıltepe Cadastral Court, E: 1973/186.
54758/12
30/05/2012
Mehmet Şirin AYDIN
05/03/1936
Mardin
Zeyni KAYHAN
10/02/1950
Istanbul
Nurhayat AYDIN KAYHAN
10/08/1964
Mardin
Fikret KAYHAN
04/04/1965
Istanbul
Eyyüp Sabır AYDIN
06/11/1981
Nevşehir
Güla Dicle AYDIN
28/11/1974
Mardin
Nadire AYDIN
01/09/1940
Mardin
Abdulhalim AYDIN
19/12/1947
Istanbul
Yılmaz FİDAN
Kızıltepe Cadastral Court, E: 2007/1
54787/12
23/05/2012
Mehmet Şirin AYDIN
05/03/1936
Mardin
Zeyni KAYHAN
10/02/1950
Istanbul
Nurhayat AYDIN KAYHAN
10/08/1964
Mardin
Fikret KAYHAN
04/04/1965
Istanbul
Eyyüp Sabir AYDIN
06/11/1981
Nevşehir
Güla Dicle AYDIN
28/11/1974
Mardin
Nadire AYDIN
01/09/1940
Mardin
Abdulhalim AYDIN
19/12/1947
Istanbul
Yılmaz FİDAN
Kızıltepe Cadastral Court, E: 2007/1
54795/12
30/05/2012
Mehmet Şirin AYDIN
05/03/1936
Mardin
Zeyni KAYHAN
10/02/1950
Istanbul
Nurhayat AYDIN KAYHAN
10/08/1964
Mardin
Fikret KAYHAN
04/04/1965
Istanbul
Eyyüp Sabır AYDIN
06/11/1981
Nevşehir
Güla Dicle AYDIN
28/11/1974
Mardin
Nadire AYDIN
01/09/1940
Mardin
Abdulhalim AYDIN
19/12/1947
Istanbul
Yılmaz FİDAN
Kızıltepe Cadastral Court, E: 2007/1.
66227/12
31/08/2012
Abas KARAASLAN
10/03/1940
Mardin
Azize KARAASLAN
01/02/1939
Mardin
Hacci ERTAŞ
01/02/1940
Mardin
Güli DOĞAN
10/07/1941
Mardin
Yılmaz FİDAN
Kızıltepe Cadastral Court, E: 1966/164
8758/13
31/12/2012
İhsan KARABOĞA
11/10/1955
Mardin
İhsan KARABOĞA
01/01/1955
Mardin
Ahmet KARABOĞA
01/08/1972
Mardin
Mahsum KARABOĞA
03/01/1965
Mardin
Hamza KARABOĞA
01/02/1975
Mardin
Abdulkerim KARABOĞA
03/01/1957
Mardin
Yılmaz FİDAN
Kızıltepe Cadastral Court, E: 1961/203, K: 2010/6
9078/13
31/12/2012
İhsan KARABOĞA
11/10/1955
Mardin
İhsan KARABOĞA
01/01/1955
Mardin
Ahmet KARABOĞA
01/08/1972
Mardin
Mahsum KARABOĞA
03/01/1965
Mardin
Hamza KARABOĞA
01/02/1975
Mardin
Abdulkerim KARABOĞA
03/01/1957
Mardin
Yılmaz FİDAN
Kızıltepe Cadastral Court, E: 1961/206.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy