CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 29 juin 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s3B53EBCA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:7pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s2D726B78 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sC8636342 { border:0.75pt solid #808080; border-collapse:collapse } .s39FC5D7A { height:22.45pt } .s13D05820 { border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sFF81EB2B { border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s8DB21C27 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s299B0C57 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:0.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-0.45pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s8611E46E { border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sECF322D0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:1.15pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-1.15pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s2999263B { height:22.4pt } .s70FB5E86 { border:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sBE757550 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sFD306575 { height:35.55pt } .s3F8B77BC { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s87680A70 { margin-left:11.67pt; text-align:center; padding-left:6.18pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold } .sEAF1EF9B { border:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .s83BD7893 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .s53E36DA2 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .s9D73D86 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .s16087E0F { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } Communicated on 29 June 2020 Published on 20 July 2020   SECOND SECTION Application no. 35040/19 Tahir ENGİN against Turkey and 4 other applications (see list appended) SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications mainly concern the domestic authorities’ failure to enforce judgments rendered in favour of the applicants, whereby they were awarded compensation for their receivables arising from labour agreements with the Yüksekova Municipality. In 2008, 2009 and 2010 the applicants were awarded compensation for their receivables arising from labour agreements with the Yüksekova Municipality in three sets of civil proceedings. The details of the proceedings and the compensation amounts awarded by the Yüksekova Civil Court are set out in Appendix. The Municipality failed to take the necessary measures to comply with the final judicial decisions and the amounts awarded by the Civil Court were not paid to the applicants. In 2013 the Court found the applicants’ applications inadmissible on the ground that they should have applied to the Compensation Commission. In 2014 the Compensation Commission found a violation of the applicants’ complaints regarding the excessive length of the proceedings and the authorities’ failure to execute the court judgments. The Commission awarded the applicants a total of 10,500 Turkish liras (TRY) (except for Sultan   Işık, who was awarded TRY 10,000), in respect of non-pecuniary compensation and held that a copy of its decision be sent to the Yüksekova Civil Court and Yüksekova Municipality. As the amounts awarded were still not paid, the applicants lodged applications with the Constitutional Court, complaining about the non-execution of the domestic courts judgments and the length of the proceedings. Their applications were rejected by the Constitutional Court on the ground that the applicants should have applied to the Compensation Commission, despite the fact that the applicants’ complaints were related to the non-payment of the awards following the Compensation Commission’s decision to that effect. Relying on Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention the applicants complain about the continuing non-execution of the final judicial decisions awarding compensation.       QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right of access to court, guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, and their right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol   No.   1 to the Convention, on account of the authorities’ failure to execute the final judicial decisions delivered by the Yüksekova Civil Court (see Kuzu v.   Turkey , no. 13062/03, 17 January 2006; Yerebasmaz v.   Turkey , no.   14710/03, 10 October 2006; Ak v. Turkey , no. 27150/02, 31 July 2007; M.   Kaplan v. Turkey , no. 29016/04, 9 December 2008; and Necati   Erol v.   Turkey , no. 4387/08, 3 November 2011)?   LIST OF APPLICATIONS No. Applicationno. Lodged on Applicant’s name date of birth place of residence Yüksekova Civil Court’s Decisions   Compensation awarded by the domestic court and the date of the execution order 1st Proceedings 2nd Proceedings 3rd Proceedings 1st Proceedings 2nd Proceedings 3rd Proceedings   35040/19 30/04/2019 Tahir ENGİN 1966 Hakkari Decision date: 28/09/2009 Final on: 02/04/2011 Decision date: 21/05/2010 Final on: 16/07/2010 × TRY 289,333. (04/06/2010)   TRY 174,139 (14/07/2010)   ×   35053/19 30/04/2019 Ferik TERKOĞLU 1949 Hakkari Decision date: 28/09/2009 Final on: 02/04/2011 Decision date: 17/07/2008 Final on: 06/03/2009 Decision date: 21/05/2010 Final on: 20/07/2010 TRY 254,499 (04/06/2010) TRY 2,310 (08/09/2008)   TRY 155,343 (12/07/2010)   35061/19 30/04/2019 Sultan IŞIK 1972 Hakkari Decision date: 28/09/2009 Final on: 02/04/2011 Decision date: 17/07/2008 Final on: 06/03/2009 × TRY 279,359 (11/06/2010) TRY 1,128 (08/09/2008) ×   35079/19 30/04/2019 Faris TAŞ 1949 Hakkari Decision date: 28/09/2009 Final on: 02/04/2011 Decision date: 17/07/2008 Final on: 06/03/2009 Decision date: 21/05/2010 Final on: 16/07/2010 TRY 305,498 (04/06/2010) TRY 2,946 (08/09/2008) TRY 105,360 (12/07/2010)   35084/19 30/04/2019 Haşim ŞATIR 1969 Hakkari Decision date: 28/09/2009 Final on: 02/04/2011 Decision date: 17/07/2008 Final on: 06/03/2009 Decision date: 21/05/2010 Final on: 16/07/2010 TRY 221,646 (05/06/2010) TRY 1,989 (08/09/2008) TRY 139,714 (14/07/2010)