Court Rejects Defence Bid in Thanasis Nikolaou Case

Decision expected on April 29

Header Image

Limassol court on Friday rejected a defence request to introduce testimony regarding the administration of the estate of Thanasis Nikolaou, in a case brought through a private criminal prosecution by his family.

The court ruled that it would deliver its decision on 29 April on all preliminary objections raised by lawyers representing the five defendants.

During the latest hearing, the court considered an application by defence counsel seeking to call evidence from the Senior Registrar. The proposed testimony aimed to confirm that the administration of Nikolaou’s estate had been concluded in 2008 and had not been reopened by court order. On that basis, the defence argued that his mother, Andriana Nikolaou, no longer holds the legal status of administrator, describing the matter as indicative of “an apparent abuse” pursued by the opposing side.

In dismissing the request, the court emphasised that, at this stage of proceedings, it could not hear testimony—particularly before the formal charging of the five defendants.

The hearing was adjourned until 29 April at 10:30, when the court is expected to announce its rulings on the remaining preliminary objections. It further indicated that, should these objections be rejected, the defendants must be prepared to respond to the charges to be brought against them.

The indictment names forensic pathologist Panicos Stavrianos, former Limassol Police Director Andreas Iatropoulos, former head of Limassol CID Nikos Sophocleous, former rural policing chief Christakis Nathanail, and Christakis Kapiliotis, former head of the Platres police station cluster.

Comments Posting Policy

The owners of the website www.politis.com.cy reserve the right to remove reader comments that are defamatory and/or offensive, or comments that could be interpreted as inciting hate/racism or that violate any other legislation. The authors of these comments are personally responsible for their publication. If a reader/commenter whose comment is removed believes that they have evidence proving the accuracy of its content, they can send it to the website address for review. We encourage our readers to report/flag comments that they believe violate the above rules. Comments that contain URLs/links to any site are not published automatically.