3 C.L.R. 1988December2 [A.LOEOUP.,DEMETRIADES.PAPADOPOULOS,HADJTTSANGARIS, CHRYSOSTOMIS,NBOTAS,ARTEMTOES,JJ] CHRISTOFOROSCONSTANTINIDES, it * Appellant-Applicant, v. THEREPUBLICOFCYPRUS,THROUGH 1.THEMINISTEROFFINANCE, 2.THEDIRECTOROFCUSTOMS&EXCISE, Respondents. 10 (RevisionalJurisdictionAppealNo.572). Customs andExciseDuties—Motor vehicles,dutyfree importation of by Cypriots—Order 188/82 oftheCouncil ofMinisters—Permanent settlement—Residenceinaforeigncountryasastudent,howeverlong,doesnot amounttopermanentsettlement—Factthatapplicant'svisastatedthathe mightworkduringthesummerdoesnotchangethenatureofhisresidence asastudentallowedbytheforeigncountry. Generalprinciplesofadministrativelaw—Determinationoffactsbyadministration/Determinationofthemeritsofthecasebyadministration—Judicial control—Courtdoesnotinterfere,unlesstheadministrationactedundera misconceptionoffactorexceededtheouterlimitsofUsdiscretion. . _* Domicileorresidence—Evidencebyapplicantaddingasubjectiveelementto thefactsbeforetheadministration—Thoughmaterial,itmustbeexamined inthecontextofthesurroundingcircumstances—Theanimusisnotconclusively established thereby—Especially when thestatements aremade ex postfacto. * Inthiscaseandonthebasisofthetotalityofthematerialplacedbefore theadministration,theCourtreachedtheconclusionthatthesubjudicedecisionwasreasonablyopentotheadministration.Thelegalprinciplesderived fromthisjudgmentaresummarisedinthenoteshereinabove. 20 Appealdismissed. Noorderastocosts. 2375 Constantinides v. Republic
(1988)Casesreferredto: Matsasv.TheRepublic
(1985)3CX.R.54; Michaelv.TheRepublic
(1986)3CL.R.2067; Ttofis7. TheRepublic
(1988)3 C.L.R. 1625; Lakatamitisv.TheRepublic
(1988)3CJLA. 1565. Appeal. Appeal against thejudgment of aJudgeof theSupreme Court of Cyprus (Kourris, J.) given on the 21st March, 1986 (Revisional Jurisdiction Case No. 473/85)* whereby appellant's recourseagainsttherefusal of therespondent tograntapplicantali- ,Q cencetoimport aduty -freemotorvehiclewasdismissed. AS. Angelides, for the applicant. D. Papadopoulou (Mrs.), fortherespondents. Cur. adv. vult. A.LOIZOUP.readthefollowingjudgment of theCourt.This 15 isan appealfromthejudgmentofaJudgeofthisCourt bywhich he upheld the decision of the respondents with which they refused tothe applicant the importation of a motor-vehicle free of import duty asnotcoming within the ambitofsub-heading 19of item 0.1 of the 4th Schedule to the Customs and Excise Duties 20 Law 1978,(Law No. 18of 1978). Thedetermination of theissuesraised inthisappeal turnon the evaluation ofthefacts thatwere before theappropriateadministra- *(Reportedin
(1986)3CLR.822). 2376 3 C.L.R. Constantinidesv. Republic A.LoizouP. tive organ, the second respondent inthis appeal, as regards the meaningandeffect of theterm"permanentsettlement"(μόνιμος εγκατάσταση). 5 ΙΟ Thefacts placed by the applicantbefore thesecondrespondent ascontainedinhisapplicationwhich isinaprintedform filledin by himarebriefly these:Theapplicantleft Cyprus attheageof 17 with avery small amountof moneyandwent totheFederal Re public of Germanyin October 1967,.asa visitor toexplore the possibilities whether hecould work andstudy atthesametime. Duringthefirstfew monthshetriedtolearntheGerman language andinMarch 1968, hepassed theentranceexaminations for the University. . w Onthe8thMay, 1968,hewas issued for thefirst timewith a . student's visa, that is, his temporary visitor's residence was 15 turnedintooneof a student's residence,.that is, his residencein thatcountry was dependedonhisstatus as astudent. Admittedly in thatvisa,as it is shown onhis passport, of thatperiod it was stated thathemight work during thesummer,obviously for the purposeof earning themeansof hissupportorat least,partof it 2Q butthisconcession doesnotchangethe natureof theresidenceal lowed tohimbytheGermanauthorirties. 2c Theapplicantstudied Medicinethecourseof which consisted ofelevent semesters..Upontheircompletionastudenthastotake thefinal examinationsof theUniversity for thepurposeofobtaining theDiplomaof Medicine.He,infact, completed his eleven semesters in thesummer of 1973 andinDecember 1974, hesat for thefinal examinations andhequalified asaDoctor. , * OQ · Inhisapplication,towhich we have already referred, afterfil linginthevarious questions andstating thathesettledpermanently abroad, thatis, in theFederal Republic of Germany,onthe 21st October 1967 he answered thequestion in the column of "Employmentabroad" as startinginJanuary 1975givinghispro fession oroccupationasthatof aDoctorandthathewentonbe ing so employed until the31st March 1984.·Furthermore,andit 2377 A.Loizou P. Constantinidesv.Republic
(1988)may usefully benoted here,in thecolumn abouttheperiodsof "StayinCyprus"sinceheemigratedabroad,hegivessixperiods of holidays in Cyprus between the 15thDecember 1975tothe 25thofMarch 1987,rangingbetween 14to24dayseachtime. Thequestion of "permanent settlement",acrucial elementin 5 therelevantOrder0.1.19hasbeenconsideredjudiciallyinanumberof casesand weshall refer tosomeofthem.Theyare,inter alia,Matsasv.TheRepublic
(1985)3C.L.R.54,Michaelv. The Republic
(1986)3C.L.R.2067andthemorerecentonesthatof AndreasTtofisv.TheRepublic,
(1988)3C.L.R. 1625andDe- 1 0 metriosLakatamitisv.TheRepublic
(1988)3C.L.R.1565.Inall ithasbeenconsistently heldthatresidenceinacountryasastudent for educationalpurposes howeverlongdoesnotamountto permanentsettlement MoreoverinarecourseunderArticle 146ofourConstitution, 15 theannulmentdirectedagainsttheadministration'sdetermination ofthefacts orquestioningthedetermination onthemeritsisaccordingtothegeneralprinciplesofAdministrativeLawthatthis Courtwillreject suchagroundexceptwheretheadministration hasactedunderamisconception offact orhasexceeded theex- 20 tremelimitsofitsdiscretionarypower. Wehaveconsideredthetotalityofthecircumstancesthatwere placedbefore theadministrationbytheapplicanthimselfandwe havecometotheconclusionthatthedecisionreachedbytherespondentswasreasonablyopentothemandthattheapplicanthas « failed toestablish thattheyhaveeitheractedunderamisconceptionoffactorhaveexceededtheextremelimitsoftheirdiscretionary powers.We may as wellpointout here that the applicant's testimony before theCourt,addedtothematerial before therespondents only a subjective element, but such element, though ^0 materialindetermining suchmattersasdomicileorresidence,it hastobeexaminedinthecontextofallsurroundingcircumstancesandnottobetakenasconclusivelyestablishingtheanimusof the person concerned and especially when such statements are madesoexpostfactoand,indeed,longthereafter. 35 2378 3 C.L.R. Constant!ηides v. Republic A. Loizou P. For all the above reasons, the appeal is dismissed but in the circumstances therewill be noorderas tocosts. Appealdismissed. Noorder as to costs. I 2379