High Court Found Against the Kulaksiz 5

High Court  Found Against the Kulaksiz 5WITHOUT  PREJUDICE

It is just as well I still have friends in north Cyprus who believe in my right to know what is going on in the above case.

You will recall I told you about the hearing at the High Court.


The outcome of the hearing was given in the High Court in Lefkosa on Thursday of last week.

My understanding of what is written in Saturday’s edition of Cyprus Today is that the High Court  found against the K5 whose legal representative was asking that the Appeal which the bank had lodged be thrown out thus meaning that the decision given by Judge Usar on the 4th December 2014 would be binding on all parties and the decision be final.

It seems the Judges at the High Court last week  felt that it would be unjust not to allow the Appeal filed against the 4th Dec. 2014  decision  by the bank to go ahead and so they found in favour of the bank.

High Court  Found Against the Kulaksiz 5

I understand this to means that the Appeal that had been scheduled for 16th October 2015, but delayed because of this case, will now go ahead on the 29th January 2016. …God willing.

I will make every effort to be there.

Pauline Read

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

3 comments to High Court Found Against the Kulaksiz 5

  • Polly Marples

    Expat buyers lose bid to halt appeal


    Chief Reporter

    MAINLY expat property buyers at the disputed Kulaksiz 5 estate have lost in their bid to have the latest court case on the matter struck out.

    A bank which bought the properties at an auction in 2010, after loans secured on the Karsiyaka development went unpaid, has appealed against a lower court ruling overturning a previous judgment that allowed the houses to be sold off.

    Girne District Court judged in December last year that the bank had acted “fraudulently” by not declaring to the title deeds office all information on the status of the land, thus preventing its head from being able to exercise his discretion.

    Last month lawyers for the buyers asked the appeal court to strike out the bank’s notice of appeal, saying it had tried to introduce a “new party” to the case and that notice of this had not been served. The bank’s lawyers argued there had been a technical mistake and there was no new party since the person they had sought to add to the appeal was Philomena Watkin-Jones, the widow of one of the buyers.

    At the latest hearing on Thursday, Chief Justice Narin Ferdi Sefik ruled in favour of the bank.

    “The -[case in question] is whether the administrator

    name in question constitutes a new party or is a’ written mistake after one of the applicants passed away and whether the first court judgment [was wrong],” she said,

    She said it was “obvious” that the “application was to make a correction” of a “technical mistake” and added that accepting the arguments of the buyers would cause an “injustice” to the bank.

    The main case will now continue on January 29.

    Maybe this will be easier to read.

    What sort of a newspaper is too wimpish to mention the name of the other half of a legal case which is heard in an open court…….IT IS KULAKSIZ 5 v AKFINANS BANK LIMITED.

  • cyprusishome

    It should be renamed “The Cyprus Comic”. I do not understand why people still buy this thing other than for lighting the fire!!! They have never undertaken proper investigative reporting even though there is obvious skill within the staff, we all know why. To simply avoid saying the name Akfinans Bank proves the point.

  • Polly Marples

    Unjust….yes…but how unjust is it to do what they are doing to pensioners.