Changes to fair compensation laws after families were forced to give up their land

Azas v. Greece  | 2002

Changes to fair compensation laws after families were forced to give up their land

An interference with the right to respect for property must strike a “fair balance” between the demands of the general interest of the community and the requirements of the protection of the individual’s fundamental rights.

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, 19 September 2002


Two families owned some land in Thessaloniki. The government took away part of the land, in order to build a new avenue in the town. However, the authorities refused to give the families compensation in line with the value of the land that they had lost. 

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

The Strasbourg court ruled that the two families had been forced to give up land, but they were only paid a fraction of the loss that they sustained – without any proper explanation. The court awarded them compensation.

This case was one example of a wider problem. The procedure for valuing expropriated property was not able to establish the true loss experienced by the owner.


The Greek Court of Cassation changed its case-law. It said that courts deciding on compensation for expropriated land should perform an overall assessment of the consequences. This helped the courts to award appropriate compensation.

The Council of Europe continues to monitor a number of issues related to expropriation of property in Greece.

Related examples

Widow wins fight for husband’s property confiscated by the police

When Karol Rummi’s husband died, his valuable possessions were arbitrarily confiscated by the police. When Mrs Rummi tried to get them back, she was not allowed to make her case in court and told that the property now belonged to the state. The European court ruled that her right to property had been breached. She was compensated and the law was changed to prevent similar problems happening again.

Read more

98 year-old wins decades-long fight for property seized by the Communist regime

After the fall of communism in Romania, laws were passed giving people the right to claim back property nationalised by the old regime. Tens of thousands of people made such claims, but a huge number faced delays and failures to deal with their applications. The European court ruled that the system must be reformed – leading to a new law which made the restitution system more effective.

Read more

Reforms after bank refused to pay out pensioner’s savings

Ruža Jeličić was a citizen of the former Yugoslavia. She worked in Germany in the 1970s and 80s and kept savings of German marks in a bank in the former Yugoslavia. However, along with thousands of others with foreign currency savings, she was banned from withdrawing the money after moving back home. After Mrs Jeličić stopped working and her husband died, she had no money to live on.

Read more

New compensation rules after villagers forced from their homes to live in extreme poverty

The government evicted the inhabitants of a small village for counter-terrorism purposes. They were not allowed to return for over 10 years. In the meantime, they were given no alternative housing or money, and they lived in extreme poverty. The Strasbourg court ruled that their rights had been violated. A new law introduced compensation for damages suffered during anti-terrorist activities.

Read more

Reforms introduced after failure to pay compensation to Chernobyl rescue worker

Anatoliy Burdov was exposed to radiation whilst working on the emergency response to the Chernobyl disaster. He was entitled to certain social benefits, but the authorities refused to pay - even when ordered to do so by Russian courts. The Strasbourg court said that this violated Mr Burdov’s rights. As a result, reforms were introduced to improve the enforcement of judgments.

Read more

Woman forced to allow hunting on her land against her beliefs

Catherine Schneider was ethically opposed to hunting, but she was forced to allow it on her land under an old law. The Strasbourg court ruled that forcing her to be part of a hunting syndicate breached her basic rights. The law was changed to allow people to follow their conscience on hunting.

Read more