The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 16 November 2006 as a Chamber composed of: Mr C.L. ROZAKIS, President, Mr R. TÜRMEN, Mrs F. TULKENS, Mrs E. STEINER, Mr K. HAJIYEV, Mr D. SPIELMANN, Mr S.E. JEBENS, judges, and Mr S. NEILSEN, Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 May 1999, Having regard to the partial decision of 13 February 2003, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Yakup Yalçın, is a Turkish national who was born in 1937 and lives in Istanbul. He was represented before the Court by Mr H. Çınar and Mr E. Çınar, lawyers practising in Ankara. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 2 YALÇIN v. TURKEY DECISION The applicant was...
CONSEIL DE L’EUROPE COUNCIL OF EUROPE COUR EUROPÉENNE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST SECTION FINAL DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 50634/99 by Yakup YALÇIN against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 16 November 2006 as a Chamber composed of: Mr C.L. ROZAKIS, President, Mr R. TÜRMEN, Mrs F. TULKENS, Mrs E. STEINER, Mr K. HAJIYEV, Mr D. SPIELMANN, Mr S.E. JEBENS, judges, and Mr S. NEILSEN, Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 May 1999, Having regard to the partial decision of 13 February 2003, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Yakup Yalçın, is a Turkish national who was born in 1937 and lives in Istanbul. He was represented before the Court by Mr H. Çınar and Mr E. Çınar, lawyers practising in Ankara. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
2 YALÇIN v. TURKEY DECISION The applicant was one of the partners of a company named Balıkçılık İstihsal ve Satış Kooperatifi ve Ocak Pastanesi Kollektif Şirketi (“the Company”). The Company, together with a joint venture partner, leased the Tuzla Lagoon in Keşan, Edirne, for seafood production for a period from 1976 to 1987. In October 1976, the Turkish, the United States and the NATO forces carried out military exercises in the area. As a result of wastes discharged by military vessels, the lagoon was polluted, which had detrimental effects on the Company’s investment. On 19 October 1979, the applicant applied to the Keşan Civil Court for an assessment of the level of the pollution and the amount of damages that his enterprise had suffered. An expert report was prepared and submitted to the court on 10 March 1980. Relying on such report, the applicant applied to the Ministry of Defence for compensation. Upon the Ministry’s refusal to compensate him, the applicant brought an action before the Keşan Civil Court, which held its first hearing on 9 March 1981. In the meanwhile, the Company became bankrupt and went into liquidation. Pursuant to the applicable bankruptcy laws, the Keşan Civil Court ruled that the applicant no longer had standing and suspended the proceedings on 23 May 1983. The court held that only the liquidator (iflas idaresi) who was in charge of the management and liquidation of the assets of the bankrupt Company, was eligible to resume the proceedings. The court relied on a bankruptcy law principle under which all receivables including the rights, interests and claims relating to ongoing litigation automatically become part of the bankruptcy estate (iflas masası), created in the name and for the benefit of the creditors of a given bankrupt company. On 23 May 1984, the liquidator applied to the Keşan Civil Court in order to resume the proceedings. From that ...