PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 17408/04) against the Republic of Turkey lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Turkish national, Ms Nurten Tunca (“the applicant”), on 19 April 2004.

The applicant was represented by Mr S. Tunca, a lawyer practising in İstanbul. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) did not designate an Agent for the purposes of the proceedings before the Court.

The applicant alleged that the unreasonable length of the civil proceedings was unreasonable. She also alleged that her right to the peaceful enjoyment of her possessions was breached.

On 23 November 2006 the Court decided to give notice of the application to the Government. Applying Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time.

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1944 and lives in İstanbul.

On 31 March 1983 the applicant bought a plot of land (plot no. 2464) in Şarköy, measuring 690 m2. On 22 January 1984, following an official cadastre measurement, the applicant's land was found to measure 564 m2. The remaining 126m2 was registered as belonging to the neighbouring plot no. 2463, owned by Mr A.Ö.

On 15 November 1993 the applicant brought proceedings against A.Ö. in the Şarköy Civil Court of General Jurisdiction, challenging the accuracy of the new measurement and requesting that the disputed land be re-registered in her name.

The Şarköy Civil Court of General Jurisdiction held thirty hearings between 15 November 1993 and 13 July 1999.

An on-site inspection was conducted on 13 July 1994 to which the applicant objected.

On 31 January 1995 the applicant referred to another proceeding that had taken place before the Şarköy Magistrate Court which was linked to her case and requested the Şarköy Civil Court of General Jurisdiction to examine the case file no. 1983/183. At the next hearing held on 4 April 1995 the applicant notified the court that the case-file brought from the archives was wrong as she had quoted the wrong reference number previously.

The correct file which was requested from the archives again could not be submitted to the court until 23 September 1997 due to, inter alia, the flooding of the archives.

On 18 December 1997 the court decided to hold a second on-site inspection, the conduct of which was delayed to 23 June 1999 mainly due to adverse weather conditions.

On 13 July 1999 the Şarköy Civil Court of General Jurisdiction declared lack of jurisdiction as the on-site inspection revealed that the value of the plot of land in dispute was lower than 2,000,000 Turkish liras. The court held that, if the applicant still intended to pursue her claim, she should institute the proceedings before the Şarköy Magistrate's Court.

On 21 July 2003, almost four years after the decision of the Civil Court of General Jurisdiction, the applicant applied to the Şarköy Magistrate's Court.

On 21 January 2004 the court granted the applicant's request and decided that the disputed land should be registered in her name.

On 24 September 2004 the Court of Cassation upheld the judgment.

The defendant requested the rectification of this decision. His request was rejected by the Court of Cassation on 13 January 2005.