LAW FOR ALL

SUPREME COURT OF CYPRUS-The applicant was the owner of items 84 and 256 Kinyras Street in San Andreas in Nicosia. On 27.4.1990, published in the Official Gazette of the Expropriation Notice No. 611, which disclosed that several pieces, including the above two properties, owned by the applicant, was "necessary for the following purpose public benefit, ie housing government departments and the expropriation is necessary for the following reason for that is building new offices Nicosia District Government . " On 15.2.1991 published in Official Gazette of the Expropriation Decree No. 213, which the Cabinet ordered the expropriation of real property contained in the Disclosure Schedule in Acquisition, excluding 5 pieces from all 15 items included in the Notification Table. In these do not include two pieces of the applicant. The beginning was alienate the Ministry of Finance.-In this case, it is clear from the facts that are admitted, that the administration after over 17 years, has decided not to those actions under the circumstances would be reasonably expected and necessary, either to implement the project, either make it feasible implementable within a reasonable time. The only noun was in the period of 17 years, was'actions and plans for the elaboration of projects " [1] that are not, of course, no plans or projects to implement the intended purpose. Instead, the administration for some time was not sure how to made ​​use of the disputed land.Hence the Council of Ministers on 19.6.2007 only gave its approval for construction of offices of the Department of Planning and Housing instead of the District Lands Office and District Offices of Agriculture, originally scheduled and published. Even he admitted Mr. Mappouridis in his speech that there were specific projects for implementation purpose, but only plans to interface with future pieces of programming and extensions of buildings already constructed, something that certainly can not meet the strictest criteria raised the case Efthimiadis above. It is evident from the above that, objectively considering the circumstances, the administration has not taken the necessary steps to implement the project within a reasonable time. The refusal of the administration to return the land to the applicant, it is illegal and should be canceled. The appeal succeeds with costs € 1300 plus VAT, for the applicant. The decision is canceled and everything have been received, as appropriate executed in accordance with Article 23.5 of the Constitution.