CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 29 mars 2011

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sE5338F84 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .s7714A00D { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s22E86835 { width:131.87pt; display:inline-block } .s576DFC5F { width:15.93pt; display:inline-block } .sAA5C5B93 { width:187.63pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s19810247 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#c0c0c0 } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sE0160E0F { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#c0c0c0 } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2342A031 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s546C9D04 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4F2EDFF { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Applications nos. 43550/07, 43558/07, 43559/07, 43567/07 and 43599/07 by Hasan ÇOBANOĞLU and Others against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 29   March 2011 as a Committee composed of:   Ireneu Cabral Barreto, President,   Dragoljub Popović,   András Sajó, judges, and Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on 28 September 2007, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applications were lodged by twenty Turkish nationals, whose names appear in the appendix hereto and who live in Şanlıurfa. They are represented before the Court by Mr M. Akdoğan and Ms S. Berkyürek, lawyers practising in Mersin, except for the applicants in applications nos.   43559/07 and 43599/07, who are represented by Mr M. Akdoğan alone. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. The applicants complained that the delay in the payment of the additional compensation which they were awarded by the Halfeti Civil Court following the expropriation of their properties violated their rights under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were invited to submit their own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By letter dated 26 November 2010, sent by registered post, the applicants’ representatives were notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations had expired on 17 February 2010 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ representatives’ attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that an applicant does not intend to pursue the application. According to the acknowledgment of receipt slip, which reached the Registry on 15 December 2010, the applicants’ representatives could not be found at the indicated address. However, no information has been received from the representatives regarding any change of address, despite the clear obligation to this effect. THE LAW 1.     Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to join them. 2.     The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their applications, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) 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 cases. 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.   Françoise Elens-Passos   Ireneu Cabral Barreto   Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX   Application No. Applicants’ names and dates of birth   43550/07   Hasan Çobanoğlu- 1930   43558/07   Mehmet Hanifi Çobanoğlu- 1926   43559/07   Ayişe Çobanoğlu- 1948 Hadice Akdoğan- 1946 Kadriye Akdoğan- 1965 Mehmet Akdoğan- 1955 Yusuf Kenan Akdoğan- 1920 Fatma Cihangir- 1950 Gürsel Güner- 1958   43567/07   Recep Akdoğan- 1934 Şakir Toksöz- 1930   43599/07   Aliye Kanbel Akbuğa- 1936 Mehmet Akbuğa- 1964 Hadice Yaşar- 1954 Havva Toksöz- 1959 Ahmet Akbuğa- 1962 Lülefer Bozkurt- 1965 Zahide Akbuğa- 1974 Muzaffer Akbuğa- 1971 Hakan Hoşgören- 1991