CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 14 juin 2005

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 76 June 2005 Yedikule Surp Pırgiç Ermeni Hastanesi Vakfı v. Turkey (dec.) - 50147/99 Decision 14.6.2005 [Section II] Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 Peaceful enjoyment of possessions Annulment of a property title and a donation in favour of a foundation created by a religious minority, on grounds that such foundations were not entitled to acquire goods: admissible   The applicant is a foundation constituted under Turkish law, created during the Ottoman Empire, belonging to a non-Muslim religious minority within the meaning of the Lausanne Treaty. It acquired ownership of a building by donation and subsequently had its property officially entered in the land register, but the Treasury obtained the annulment of the property title and the re-registration of the property in the name of the former owner. The court applied the case-law established in May 1974, whereby the acquisition of property by purchase or donation was prohibited for foundations which belonged to religious minorities as defined in the Lausanne Treaty and which had omitted to declare in their constitution that they had capacity to acquire real estate. The applicant foundation acquired the ownership of another building by donation. The Treasury obtained the annulment of the donation on the basis of the same case-law of May 1974. During the proceedings a judicial expert indicated that the applicant foundation’s constitution empowered it to acquire real estate. After a change in the law, foundations were recognised as having capacity to acquire and alienate real estate, subject to administrative authorisation. The applicant foundation then applied for the two properties of which it had been dispossessed by judicial decision to be entered in the land register under its own name. Its applications were dismissed on the ground that the property was already registered either in its own name or in that of a third party. Admissible under Article 6 § 1   [fair trial], Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, and Article 14, after joinder to the merits of the plea of non-exhaustion of domestic remedies.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes