The Court's decision is a follow-up of a judgment given 13 years ago, based on an interstate application filed by Cyprus. The Court has, for the first time, ruled on a just compensation amount under Article 41 of the Convention.

Cyprus has been divided as a result of the Turkish military operation from July to August of 1974. The northern part of the island became the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) in November 1983 and adopted its own constitution in May 1985. According to Cyprus, the new state came into existence in an unlawful manner according to international law, and the international community did condemn the creation of TRNC. Turkey claimed, however, that it couldn't be held responsible for any actions taken by the independent TRNC. In its complaint, filed to the Court, Cyprus accused Turkey of violating Article 1 (respecting human rights) and almost all of the other articles of the Convention on Human Rights, including Article 2 (the right to life), Article 3 (ban on torture), and the violation of Article 5 (right to freedom and personal safety) in multiple ways: missing Cypriot Greeks and their families; problems with respecting the peace of houses and private properties of displaced people; the living conditions of Cypriot Greek on Karpas; the situation of Cypriot Turks who opposed the rule of TRNC; and the living conditions of the Roma community.

In the Grand Chamber's ruling from May 10, 2001, the Court recognized violations of Articles 3, 5, and 8 of the Convention and Article 1 of the Convention's Protocol (right to property). The latter was a result of the loss of access to the lands in the northern parts of the island by Cypriot Greeks. It was allegedly a result of the 1974 military operation, the division of Cyprus and the actions of TRNC authorities. The Court ruled that the questions surrounding a just compensation are to be decided during a later session. While informing both governments about the ruling in 1999, the Strasburg judges explicitly asked them not to file any claims for compensation under Article 41 while the substantive part of the proceedings took place. The Court did not give the parties specific dates for when they could state their claims. According to the Court's regulations, a compensation claim ought to be stated as an answer to a case's announcement; should that process fail to be observed, a compensation claim is forfeited.

While examining the question of granting a compensation, the Court had to recognize if - in spite of a lack of hard dates - the fact that the Cypriot government failed to state a claim by the date of March 11, 2010, caused the claim to be forfeited. Both governments could have shared the belief that the question of just compensation was dependent on later developments. The Cypriot government has never said, explicitly or otherwise, that it waives its claim to compensation. Under such circumstances, the Turkish government's position is that an examination of the Cypriot government's claim on a postponed date would not be harmful to its rightful interests.

The Turkish government had to know that the question would arise at some point, and now a decision has been rendered. The Court has granted Cyprus 30 million euros in compensation due to the harm done to the missing people and their family members, and 60 million euros in compensation for the sufferings of the inhabitants of Karpas. The money is to be distributed among the 1,456 victims mentioned in the verdict. The Court specified that the execution of the judgment be overseen by the Committee of Ministers.

The Cypriot government has asked the Court for a declaratory ruling, which would hold that under the ruling of 2001, Turkey is obliged to cease any actions prohibiting or hampering Cypriot Greeks from taking advantage of their property rights in the northern part of Cyprus. The Court failed to agree with this request, and underscored that under Article 46 of the Convention, the states have agreed to follow the ultimate rulings in each case. The fulfillment of this duty remains under the supervision of the Committee of Ministers.