The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 7 June 2016 as a Chamber composed of: Julia Laffranque, President, Işıl Karakaş, Nebojša Vučinić, Paul Lemmens, Valeriu Griţco, Ksenija Turković, Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, judges, and Stanley Naismith, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 February 2010, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS 1. The applicants, Mr Maksut Paksoy, Ms Güler Ayabakan, Ms Alime Aydede, Ms Mebzul Dalbudak, Mr Ahmet Melih Dedeköy, Ms Mahiser Şamlıoğlu, Mr Mustafa Sezdi, Mr Hacı Abdi Sezdi, Mr Mükremin Sezdi, Ms Ulviye Sezdi (Birol), Ms Dürdane Sezdi (Saydam), Ms Emine Sezdi (Şentürk), Mr İhsan Yazıcı, Mr İsmail Mehmet Yazıcı and Ms Ayşe Yazıcı, are fifteen Turkish nationals. They were born in 1940, 1950, 1932, 1945, 1980, 1948, 1943, 1952, 1954, 1956, 1947, 1943, 1934, 1967 and 1968...
SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 19474/10 Maksut PAKSOY and others against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 7 June 2016 as a Chamber composed of: Julia Laffranque, President, Işıl Karakaş, Nebojša Vučinić, Paul Lemmens, Valeriu Griţco, Ksenija Turković, Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, judges, and Stanley Naismith, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 February 2010, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS 1. The applicants, Mr Maksut Paksoy, Ms Güler Ayabakan, Ms Alime Aydede, Ms Mebzul Dalbudak, Mr Ahmet Melih Dedeköy, Ms Mahiser Şamlıoğlu, Mr Mustafa Sezdi, Mr Hacı Abdi Sezdi, Mr Mükremin Sezdi, Ms Ulviye Sezdi (Birol), Ms Dürdane Sezdi (Saydam), Ms Emine Sezdi (Şentürk), Mr İhsan Yazıcı, Mr İsmail Mehmet Yazıcı and Ms Ayşe Yazıcı, are fifteen Turkish nationals. They were born in 1940, 1950, 1932, 1945, 1980, 1948, 1943, 1952, 1954, 1956, 1947, 1943, 1934, 1967 and 1968 respectively. They were represented before the Court by Ms Bahar Argın, a lawyer practising in Istanbul.
2 PAKSOY AND OTHERS v. TURKEY DECISION A. The circumstances of the case 2. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. 3. A plot of land in Avcılar, in the Merkez District of Istanbul, was registered in the land register as plot no. 23, parcel no. 4354, in the name of Maksut Paksoy and Ömer Paksoy, the applicants’ predecessors. 4. In 1978, the plot of land in question was designated as a primary school area in the local land development plan. The designation of the plot of land remained unchanged in subsequent plans drawn up between 1978 and 2007. 5. On 26 March 2007 the applicants applied to the municipality to have the local land development plan altered. On 8 October 2007 the municipality rejected the applicants’ request. 6. On 3 January 2008 the applicants instituted proceedings before the Istanbul Administrative Court seeking to have the local land development plan annulled. On 15 January 2008 the Istanbul Administrative Court dismissed the applicants’ case. 7. On 11 March 2008 the applicants instituted another set of proceedings before the Küçükçekmece Civil Court of First Instance, claiming compensation for the decrease in the market value of the land and the long- term uncertainty about the fate of the land. On 16 July 2008 the court dismissed the case, holding that the authorities had not seized the land in question. An appeal and a request for rectification lodged by the applicants were subsequently rejected by the Court of Cassation, and the decision became final on 15 October 2009. B. Relevant domestic law 1. Local land development plans 8. According to section 3 of the Zoning Act (Law no. 3194), land cannot be used for any purpose other than that indicated in the local land development plans. 9. Section 10(1) of the same Act provides that the municipalities should prepare their five-year zoning progr...