Pauline, Understand the concept and it has it’s merits. …

Monday, February 22, 2010
By Malcolm Channing

Comment posted Tit for tat, how to use “exchange” land to your advantage by VinceHugo.

Pauline,
Understand the concept and it has it’s merits. The bit I am puzzled by is this. RoC law would presumably only accept that the land in the South was owned by the TC – any subsequent transactions in the TRNC would not be recognised. So surely the only person that can progress this claim is the TC who received “Exchange” land in the North. And if that TC has sold the land on then, as I understand it, he is prevented under TRNC law from making a claim for his/her original land (because as far as the TRNC Government is concerned they now hold the title for the land in the South pending a settlement).

VinceHugo also commented

  • YS,
    Your attempts at reasoned debate are frankly embarassing. And it’s quite apparent who the extremist is around here.
    But hey, the link was really informative – thanks.
  • YS,
    If you stick a gun to my head then it doesn’t matter whether you galvanise, encourage, cuddle or entertain me – you will get what you want. And if I hand over my dosh then you can’t sieze it by authority. So how does this go anyway towards explaining your contradictions?

    I strongly recommend (for the sake of your fellow Cypriots) that you stop digging and put the shovel down.

  • Carry on digging your hole YS. You know nothing about me.
    But with the (vain) hope of providing you with a bit of an English language lesson here are a couple of definitions for you (Collins Dictionary)
    galvanize – to stimulate into action
    confiscate – to seize (property) by authority
    Same thing . . really?
  • YS,
    I can certainly agree with you on one thing. Expats have been reading some very different history books to the ones you take your “facts” from. Although your facts don’t seem entirely consistent. For example, were the TC’s legal deeds “confiscated” or where they “galvanised into surrendering” them. Very different stories.
    The suggestion that expats are “practically taking up arms against GC’s” whilst you are spitting out bigotry,venom and hatred is almost laughable.
    If you really are representative of all GCs then I fear for the future of Cyprus. Happily I don’t believe you are and I think your continued postings on here will be seen by all for what they are.
  • Ian,

    Don’t forget that you are “PERSONA NON GRADA”

Recent comments by VinceHugo

  • “Talat Kursat is not an ISO 9001 registered client of WCS and never has been”
    Thomas,

    I can fully understand and accept that a solicitor (or advocate) might well act for a range of clients including buyers and sellers of property. This would also be perfectly normal in the UK too. The bit that would be unacceptable is a solicitor (or advocate) was acting for both sides on a specific transaction ie. both the buyer and the seller of a particular property. Is that what you are saying Talat Kursat has been doing?

  • “Talat Kursat is not an ISO 9001 registered client of WCS and never has been”
    Malcolm,
    The general thrust of the comments in this thread is that the the questionmark over ISO9001 certification demonstrates questionable practices by Talat Kursat. 
    Displaying an accreditation which they are not entitled to, IF this turns out to be the case, is a serious matter, but not as serious as failing to do what they say they will do for their clients. So the point I wanted to make, to add a little balance to the debate, is that in my personal experience Talat Kursat has proved to be a good advocate. That’s all.
  • “Talat Kursat is not an ISO 9001 registered client of WCS and never has been”
    I would like to add my voice to Bryn’s on this one. I have used Talat Kursat for many years and always found him  to be diligent, dependable, proactive and a nice bloke to boot. Now it has been raised, I hope the position on ISO9001 is clarified but I can honestly say that I relied on personal recommendations when choosing my Advocate – ISO9001 didn’t come into it.
  • North Cyprus entertainer defends right to perform without work permit
    “Whether they are singers, DJs or, bands, in whatever way these people generate an income, they will be liable to pay tax as well!”

    If Barry isn’t charging for his services then I guess that means he doesn’t have to pay tax. So there isn’t a problem, is there?

  • Embargoed! stepping up the battle against racism
    Haier,

    To be clear, the ECHR looked at the IPC set up by Turkey several years ago and administered by the TRNC courts under TRNC law. They decided that it was an acceptable domestic remedy for GC’s seeking settlement on property in the TRNC.  I saw the “legal battle” and would say that it was a very clear win for Turkey.

    Furthermore, the ECHR accepted that the IPC did not need to provide compensation for loss of use, emotional damage etc. OTHER THAN as part of a full and final settlement of their property claim – in other words GC’s can’t just claim for loss of use and keep their rights to the property. So it was never intended to be an adequate remedy purely for loss of use.

    It seems you missed Dominic’s question asking what GC’s were doing about returning land or compensating TC’s. I’d be really interested to hear what’s planned by the RoC on this as it seems they are rather falling behind Turkey in attempting to put things right.

powered by SEO Super Comments

Editor and owner of NCFP and NCFP Classified Ads
Malcolm Channing
Number of View :3397
  • PrintFriendly
  • Share/Bookmark

NCFP Classified Ads

Search Articles

Archives