THE GOVERNMENT’S OBJECTION AS TO THE EXHAUSTION OF DOMESTIC REMEDIES 34.

However, he failed to use any of these remedies.

Law – Article 6 § 1 (a)     Admissibility (i)     Exhaustion of domestic remedies – The Government argued that the applicants had failed to exhaust domestic remedies as they had not

They have not referred to the remedies introduced by the 2004   Act.

They did not refer to the remedies introduced by the 2004 Act. The applicant did not address that issue.

They did not refer to the remedies introduced by the 2004 Act. The applicant did not address that issue.

Accordingly, the applicant had complied with the requirement to exhaust domestic remedies.

travaux d'aménagement, effectués en 2006 par l'administration en aval de l'exutoire situé sur le terrain des demandeurs, avaient amélioré les conditions d'écoulement des eaux du fossé collecteur et remédié

, and having noted moreover that there is an increase of the amounts awarded under the compensatory remedy by the domestic courts;   Considering that substantial progress has been achieved with the

, that is to say the new remedy.

    The Court observes that, as pointed out by the Government, a new domestic remedy has been established in Turkey.

, that is to say the new remedy.

    The Government asked the Court to reject this complaint for non ‑ exhaustion of domestic remedies.

Subsequently, in Vlad , cited above, §§ 24-32, the Court considered it appropriate to apply an exception to the general principle that the effectiveness of a given remedy was to be assessed with reference

Subsequently, in its decision in the case of Turgut and Others, cited above, the Court declared a new application inadmissible on the ground that the applicants had failed to exhaust domestic remedies,

Accordingly, they maintained that the applicants had not exhausted domestic remedies, as they had not made any application to the Compensation Commission. 13.

    According to the Court’s settled case-law, a remedy which will not bear fruit in sufficient time does not fall within the category of the “effective remedies” which Article 35 obliges applicants

December, 1967, the applicant was notified that the Lord Chancellor to whom he had similarly applied would take no action to remedy the alleged injustices in his case.

The Court considers that this is a remedy which must be exhausted by the applicant in order to comply with Article 35 § 1 of the Convention.