{"title":"公共利益与产权保护的平衡:欧洲人权法院关于征收的判决","authors":"M. Dülger","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2560894","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The protection of property, historically and practically is crucial in many aspects. The laws of democratic countries, as well as the international agreements put importance on such regulations. One of the common types of restriction to the right of a peaceful enjoyment of property comes from the State, as expropriation with a legitimate aim to protect public interest. It is significant to maintain a balance between the public interest and the protection of property; but in some ways it can be disrupt against equity. About unlawful expropriation or any other kind of confiscation; the national courts may be more distant about imposing sanction to the State; but the International Law and Courts are more restrictive and strict about State’s unjust actions. The most significant International Agreement the Turkish Government sticks to is The European Convention on Human Rights. The Court’s judgments are binding; so the government has efforts to adapt itself to the Convention and tries to avoid being sentenced to judicial fine. One of the Decisions that may lead to a change in Turkish legislation, is the Court’s decision on the “Case of Devecioglu v. Turkey” (Application no. 17203/03) given on 13 November 2008, about the protection of property.","PeriodicalId":119166,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Courts of Human Rights (Topic)","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Balance between the Public Interest and the Protection of Property Rights: A Judgment by the European Court of Human Rights About Expropriation\",\"authors\":\"M. Dülger\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2560894\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The protection of property, historically and practically is crucial in many aspects. The laws of democratic countries, as well as the international agreements put importance on such regulations. One of the common types of restriction to the right of a peaceful enjoyment of property comes from the State, as expropriation with a legitimate aim to protect public interest. It is significant to maintain a balance between the public interest and the protection of property; but in some ways it can be disrupt against equity. About unlawful expropriation or any other kind of confiscation; the national courts may be more distant about imposing sanction to the State; but the International Law and Courts are more restrictive and strict about State’s unjust actions. The most significant International Agreement the Turkish Government sticks to is The European Convention on Human Rights. The Court’s judgments are binding; so the government has efforts to adapt itself to the Convention and tries to avoid being sentenced to judicial fine. One of the Decisions that may lead to a change in Turkish legislation, is the Court’s decision on the “Case of Devecioglu v. Turkey” (Application no. 17203/03) given on 13 November 2008, about the protection of property.\",\"PeriodicalId\":119166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PSN: Courts of Human Rights (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-02-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PSN: Courts of Human Rights (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2560894\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Courts of Human Rights (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2560894","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Balance between the Public Interest and the Protection of Property Rights: A Judgment by the European Court of Human Rights About Expropriation
The protection of property, historically and practically is crucial in many aspects. The laws of democratic countries, as well as the international agreements put importance on such regulations. One of the common types of restriction to the right of a peaceful enjoyment of property comes from the State, as expropriation with a legitimate aim to protect public interest. It is significant to maintain a balance between the public interest and the protection of property; but in some ways it can be disrupt against equity. About unlawful expropriation or any other kind of confiscation; the national courts may be more distant about imposing sanction to the State; but the International Law and Courts are more restrictive and strict about State’s unjust actions. The most significant International Agreement the Turkish Government sticks to is The European Convention on Human Rights. The Court’s judgments are binding; so the government has efforts to adapt itself to the Convention and tries to avoid being sentenced to judicial fine. One of the Decisions that may lead to a change in Turkish legislation, is the Court’s decision on the “Case of Devecioglu v. Turkey” (Application no. 17203/03) given on 13 November 2008, about the protection of property.