Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 170
January 2014
Dexter and Others v. Cyprus (dec.) - 62322/11, 63049/11 and 68057/11
Decision 17.12.2013 [Section IV]
Article 35
Article 35-1
Exhaustion of domestic remedies
Failure to exhaust effective domestic remedies to obtain title to property: inadmissible

Facts – The case concerned three applications lodged by five British citizens, who bought plots of land with a view to building houses in Cyprus in 2002/03. However, they subsequently discovered many irregularities concerning the land and/or houses and were ultimately unable to obtain title to their properties. They filed complaints against the property development companies who had sold them the land with the Cypriot Competition and Consumer Protection Service (“CCPS”). However, the CCPS dismissed their complaints on the ground that the law on the basis of which that body operated had come into force only after the applicants had purchased their land and did not have retrospective effect. The applicants did not initiate any court proceedings since they considered the available domestic remedies ineffective in their particular situation, particularly in view of the costs of bringing proceedings, alleged difficulties in finding a trustworthy lawyer, and the likely length of the proceedings.
Law – Article 35 § 1: Specific remedies existed in the Cypriot domestic legal system in respect of the applicants’ complaints that they had not been able to obtain title deeds to their property and of the consequences that entailed. Specifically, domestic law provided a property buyer with an action aimed at obtaining specific performance of the contract for sale of immovable property and it was also possible to bring a civil action before the domestic courts concerning the issues the applicants complained of. Moreover, domestic law made provision for both secure and unsecured creditors in the event of insolvency. Finally, a number of significant amendments had been introduced in April 2011 to address problems that had arisen with regard to obtaining title deeds, in particular, when the property did not comply with planning permission and/or a building permit. The applicants had failed to demonstrate that they had taken the necessary steps to exhaust any of the above remedies in respect of their complaints and there were no grounds for considering that those specific remedies were in any way inadequate or ineffective. Nor were there any exceptional circumstances capable of exempting the applicants from the obligation to exhaust domestic remedies. The only avenue of redress the applicants did try – a complaint to the CCPS – could not be regarded as a remedy requiring exhaustion in respect of their Convention grievances.
Conclusion: inadmissible (failure to exhaust domestic remedies).

© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights
This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.
Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes