Published on 28 July 2025
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 49839/20
Lambros VLACHOS against Greece
and 4 other applications
(see list appended)
communicated on 7 July 2025
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applications concern the designation of the applicants’ registered properties as public area to be reafforested.
In particular, by a 1978 presidential decree, the applicants’ properties, located in Panorama-Ano Menidiatika, were incorporated in the urban development plan of Galatsi as public area. The applicants successfully challenged the designation of their properties as public area, but no administrative action was taken for more than 20 years either to remove the encumbrance or to carry out expropriation procedures. After a fresh action for failure to act, a new topographic plan was drawn up in 2005 designating the applicants’ properties as private. However, the forest service then raised the issue of reafforestation and blocked the amendment of the city plan of Galatsi.
Subsequently, administrative removal protocols were issued in 2011 on the ground that the applicants’ properties had been characterised as public area to be reafforested. The applicants contested the protocols, which the Athens Justice of the Peace (a full-jurisdiction court) annulled in 2012 ruling that the disputed properties were of private and non-forest nature.
In the meantime, the Decentralised Administration of Attica had issued decisions in 2011 ordering the demolition/removal of unauthorised structures on the applicants’ properties on the ground that it was public area to be reafforested. The applicants contested the decisions before the Athens Administrative Court of Appeals, which ruled on points of law and rejected their action for annulment in 2017.
In addition, on 26 March 2014 the Decentralised Administration of Attica issued a decision declaring an area in Panorama-Ano Menidiatika that included the applicants’ properties as public area to be reafforested. Likewise, the applicants contested the decision before the Athens Administrative Court of Appeals, which ruled on points of law and rejected their action for annulment in 2015. In particular, it ruled that inaction on the part of the administration to amend the city plan of Galatsi had rendered the applicants’ properties “unregulated”; and that the applicants were not entitled to compensation on the ground that their properties had never been intended for construction or cultivation and, therefore, they had not been substantially burdened by the reafforestation decision.
The applicants appealed against both judgments of the Athens Administrative Court of Appeals, but the Supreme Administrative Court rejected their appeals in 2020 and 2019 respectively.
In 2015 and parallel to the court proceedings, the applicants successfully objected the cadastral registration of their properties as public area to be reafforested. As a result, their properties appear on the cadastre as “private properties within the city plan” and “of non-forest nature”. What is more, in 2018 the forest map of the Municipality of Galatsi was ratified. According to the map, the applicants’ properties do not lie within forest land.
The applicants complain under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that the legal status of their properties is unclear owing to the conflicting outcomes of the court proceedings and the cadastre registration procedure. Furthermore, they complain under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that there is no provision under national law for a preliminary administrative procedure prior to the adoption of the demolition and reafforestation decisions and for judicial review of those decisions by a full-jurisdiction court.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has there been a violation of the applicants’ rights under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention (see Papastavrou and Others v. Greece, no. 46372/99, §§ 36-38, ECHR 2003-IV)?
2. Has there been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention on account of the fact that there is no provision under national law for a preliminary administrative procedure prior to the adoption of the demolition and reafforestation decisions and for judicial review of those decisions by a full-jurisdiction court entitled to examine the relevant factual issues (see Ramos Nunes de Carvalho e Sá v. Portugal [GC], nos. 55391/13 and 2 others, §§ 176-186, 6 November 2018)?
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Case name
Applicant
Year of Birth
Nationality
Represented by
1.
49839/20
Vlachos v. Greece
Lambros VLACHOS
1943
Greek
Vasilios CHATZIGIANNAKIS
2.
50316/20
Markos v. Greece
Lambros MARKOS
Greek
Vasilios CHATZIGIANNAKIS
3.
50325/20
Bekos v. Greece
Iraklis BEKOS
1935
Greek
Vasilios CHATZIGIANNAKIS
4.
50407/20
Markopoulos v. Greece
Dimitrios MARKOPOULOS
1971
Greek
Vasilios CHATZIGIANNAKIS
5.
50757/20
Drakou and Others v. Greece
Aikaterini DRAKOU
1982
Greek
Anastasios DRAKOS
1962
Greek
Athanasia DRAKOU
1941
Greek
Stamatia DRAKOU
1968
Greek
Vasilios CHATZIGIANNAKIS