JJ.] 1961 Feb. 10 Applicant, THEODOROS PANAYIOTI SHOURRJS Respondent, AND THE REPUBLIC AND GREGORIS N. KAZANTZIS G R E G O R I S N. KAZANTZLS THE POLICE [Ο' B R I A I N , P., Z E K I A , VASSILIADES and JOSEPHIDES, T H E O D O R O S PANAYIOTT S H O U R R I S v. V. THE REPUBLIC V. Applicant, v. T H E POLICE Respondents. (Criminal Applications Nos. 3 and 8/61). Criminal Procedure—Appeal—Appeal against conviction or sen tence by the, person convicted—Leave—No longer required— The Covrts of Justice Law, 1960 {Law of the Republic No. 14 of 1960), section 25
(2)—Greek and Turkish texts of the sub section—"δύναται...." "hak olarak...."—No conflict between the two texts. The applicants, who were convicted and sentenced by a court exercising criminal jurisdiction, both applied severally to the High Court for leave to appeal under the relevant sections of P a r t V of the Criminal Procedure Law, Cap.155. Section 25
(2)of the Courts of Justice Law, 1960, (Law of the Republic No. 14 of 1960) in its Greek version provides t h a t " every such appeal may be made ( " δ ύ ν α τ α ι νά άσκΦβη") against conviction or sentence on any ground". In the corresponding Turkish text, however, t h e words "hak olarak" are used. They mean " a s of right". On the question whether or not, in view of t h e discrepancy between the two versions, leave to appeal is required:— Held:
(1)There is no conflict between the Greek word " δ ύ ν α τ α ι " in section 25
(2)of the Courts of Justice Law, I960, and the word "kak olarak" used in t h e corresponding Turkish text of t h a t sub-section. What is expressed by "hak olarak" in Turkish ("as of right 1 *) is conveyed by t h e Greek word " δ ύ ν α τ α ι " used in the Greek version, which connotes, when unqualified, not merely the power or ability to appeal b u t also the legal right to dd so.
(2)Consequently a person convicted may lodge a notice 1961 Feb. 10 THEODOROS PANAYIOTI SHOURRIS V. T H E REPUBLIC AND GRbGORIS N . KAZANTZIS V. of appeal in all cases either against conviction or against sentence and leave by this Court or any Judge thereof is no longer a requisite. Both applications placed on the list for hearing asappeals. Applications for leave to appeal. THE POLICE These two applications (Nos.3/61 and 8/61, respectively) were set down for hearing by the High Court as test cases after the enactment of the new Courts of Justice Law, 1960 (Law of the Republic No.14 of 1960), for a decision on the point whether leave to appeal was any more required as was the case prior to the enactment of the aforementioned law. B. Vassiliades for applicant in application No. 3/61. A. Triantafyllidesfor applicant in application No. 8/61. Criton Tornaritis, Attorney-General, for the Republic. The facts sufficiently appear in thejudgment of theCourt delivered by : O'BRIAIN, P.: These are two applications for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence. The point for con sideration, at this stage, is whether there is any difference in effect between the Greek text,and the Turkish text of section 25
(2)of the Courts of Justice Law, 1960. This section deals with appeals from a decision of a Court exercising criminal jurisdiction and it provides that every such decision shall be subject to an appeal to this Court. It then provides that such appeals against conviction or sentence may be made, on any ground, but in the Turkish text the words ''hak olarak'' are used. The Court is satisfied that they mean 'as of right*; no such adverbial phrase is found in the Greek text. However, the matter has now been argued by the Attor ney-General in person arid by the counsel for the appUcants and this Court is unanimously of opinion that there is, in effect, no difference between the two texts. What is ex pressed by 'hak olarak"in Turkish ('as of right') is conveyed by the Greek word "δύναται" used in the corresponding clause in theGreekversion, which connotes, when unqualified, not merely the power or ability to appeal but also the legal right to do so and is not inconsistent with the Turkish text. 12 In the circumstances the Court is unanimously of the opinion that there is no conflict between the two texts. The other questions which might have arisen do not require consideration. 1961 Feb. 10 THEODOROS PANAYIOTI SHOURRIS V. In the result, this Court is of opinion that in the case of appeal against conviction or sentence the section in question, section 25
(2), gives a convicted person the right to appeal from every such decision and leave by this Court or any judge thereof is no longer a requisite. We shall place these two applications for leave to appeal on the list for hearing at an early date as appeals. Any other applications for leave to appeal already lodged with the Registrar will be listed similarly at an early date for hearing as appeals. In future, no such applications for leave to appeal should be made. A person convicted may lodge a notice of appeal in all cases. Both applications placed on thelistfor hearingasappeals. 13 THE REPUBLIC AND GREGORIS N. KAZANTZIS v. THE POLICE