Constitutional Court

The applicant filed a Referral based on the Article 113.7 and 21.4 of the Constitution, Articles 20, 22.7 and 22.8 of the Law no. 03/L-121 on the Constitutional Court of Kosovo, of 15 January 2009, The applicant filed his referral to the Constitutional Court on 9 December 2010, The subject matter of this Referral is the claim which the Institute for Protection of Monuments from Tirana has filed against the Directorate for Culture, Youth and Sports of the Municipality of Gjakova, for payment of debt in the amount of 16.206,00 Euros, The District Commercial Court in Prishtina has by judgment determined that the Institute for Protection of Monuments in Tirana, and the Directorate for Culture, youth and Sports of the Municipality of Gjakova had entered into contractual relations, in preparing technical investment documentation no. 18, by which the claimant was obliged to draft a conservation project for the “Ura e Taliqit” [Taliqi Bridge] in Gjakova, for the respondent, and the Contract on preparation of technical investment documentation no. 19, by which the claimant was obliged to draft a conservation project for the “Ura e Tabakut” [Tabak Bridge] in Gjakova, for the purposes of the respondent. The claimant performed on its obligations as per contract to the respondent, while the respondent failed to perform on its contractual obligation in terms of payment of agreed price, although the Board of Directors of the Municipality of Gjakova rendered a decision on 10 May 2004 to execute payment for completed works to the claimant.
The Applicant claims that the judgment of the District Commercial Court in Prishtina contains serious violations of the Law on Public Finance management and Accountability no. 03/L-048, specifically Article 68. (paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 4).
The Court notes that the judgment of the District Commercial Court was rendered on 17th of June 2009, and served on the Applicant on 18th of July 2009, while the Applicant only filed its Referral with the Constitutional Court on 9th of December 2010.
Based on the above, the Referral is found to have been filed beyond the deadline provided by Article 49 of the Law on the Constitutional Court.
Therefore, pursuant to Article 113.4 and Article 113.7, and in accordance with Article 49 of the Law, the Constitutional Court unanimously decided to reject the referral as inadmissible.