Chairman Planning Authority , Constitutional Court's judgment of 31   May 2000; Emanuel and Rita Bezzina v.

Erick Altabe, Mr Jean-Jacques Assouline, Mr   Stéphane Aszerman, Mr   Alexandre Athea, Mr Michel Athouel, Mr Jean-Jacques Avrane, Mr   Alain Batarec, Mr Richard Benichou, Mr Laurent Bennaim

  Malta (no. 35829/03, 24 October 2006) and Bezzina Wettinger and Others v.

between 1967, the year of ratification and entry into force of the Convention in respect of Malta, and 1987, the year in which the State’s declaration under former Article 25 became effective (see Bezzina

In this connection, they relied on Bezzina Wettinger and Others v.   Malta (no. 15091/06, 8   April 2008) and J. Lautier Company Limited v.   Malta ((dec.), no.

January 1967 (including Protocol   No. 1), the Court is competent ratione temporis to examine complaints in so far as they relate to events which took place from 23   January 1967 onwards (see Bezzina

omissions must conform to the Convention or its Protocols and subsequent facts fall within the Court’s jurisdiction even where they are merely extensions of an already existing situation (see, for example, Bezzina

Article 35 § 1 requires that the complaints intended to be made subsequently before the Court should have been made, at least in substance, to the appropriate domestic body (see Bezzina Wettinger and Others

  45917/99, 23   February 1999; Benamar and Others v. France (dec.), no.   42216/98, 14   November 2000; A.D. v. Switzerland (dec.), no.

the Court notes that, according to the Land Acquisition (Public Purposes) Ordinance, it was up to the authorities to initiate the relevant compensation proceedings (see paragraph 19 above) (see also Bezzina

  Chairman Planning Authority , Constitutional Court’s judgment of 31   May 2000; Emanuel and Rita Bezzina v.

cultural and linguistic environment of their country of origin, whether they have other relatives there, and whether it could be expected that the parents would return to that country (see, for instance, Benamar

  45917/99, 23   February 1999; Benamar and Others v. France (dec.), no.   42216/98, 14   November 2000; and A.D. v. Switzerland (dec.), no.

Turkey (dec.), no. 47826/99, 3 October 2006); whether the applicant had a sufficient personal or legal interest in the outcome of the proceedings (see (b), below, compare Bezzina Wettinger and Others v

including Protocol   No. 1), the Court is competent ratione temporis to examine complaints in so far as they relate to events which took place from 23   January 1967 onwards (ibid; see also Bezzina

  12413/03, § 1, 12 December 2006; Bezzina Wettinger and Others v.   Malta , no. 15091/06, § 68, 8 April 2008; and Erduran and Em Export Dış Tic A.Ş. , cited above, § 61).

Court is therefore competent to examine facts which occurred between 1967, the year of ratification, and 1987, the year in which the State’s declaration under former Article 25 became effective (see Bezzina

cultural and linguistic environment of their country of origin, whether they had other relatives there, and whether it could be expected of the parents to return to that country (see, for instance, Benamar

Benim Kürt kardeşlerimi sokağa dökerek 52 kişinin ölümüne yol açan kişiler yargılanmayacak da parlamentoda boy gösterecek, arkasında PKK’nin, PYD’nin, YPG’nin olduğunu söyleyenler temiz olacak öyle mi?