Constitutional Court

KI228/19, Applicant: Limak Kosovo International Airport J.S.C., “Adem Jashari”, Constitutional review of Judgment Rev. No. 268/2019 of the Supreme Court of Kosovo, of 4 September 2018

KI228/19, Resolution on Inadmissibility, of 10 December 2020, published on 21 January 2021

Keywords: individual referral, legal person, manifestly ill-founded,

The Applicant and the Government of the Republic of Kosovo signed a Public-Private Partnership Agreement (the PPPA), and based on this agreement the Applicant was obliged to keep all employees in employment for a further 3 (three) years.

Consequently, the Applicant notified the employee M.Ç. that her employment contract will not be renewed. The employee M.Ç. filed a lawsuit with the first instance court and her lawsuit was approved.

The Applicant alleges that the Supreme Court of Kosovo, by its judgments on different legal provisions of the LL for employees who have over 10 years of work experience and for employees who have less than 10 years of work experience upheld the same provisions on different legal issues.

The Court considered as ungrounded the Applicant’s allegation of erroneous conclusion of the regular courts regarding the years of service of the employee M.Ç., this is because the regular courts, which are competent to fully determine the factual situation found that the working place of the employee M.Ç., was of a permanent nature.

In the Referral before the Constitutional Court, the Applicant alleged a violation of Article 31 of the Constitution on the grounds of unreasoned decision, as well as Articles 32 and 46 of the Constitution, and reiterated his allegations as before the regular courts.

The Constitutional Court, addressing the Applicant’s allegations, held that the latter failed to present evidence, facts and arguments showing that the proceedings before the regular courts violated his right to fair and impartial trial guaranteed by Article 31 of the Constitution, and the Court failed to consider the Applicant’s further allegations on the grounds that the violations of other rights, were allegedly a consequence of violation of the right to fair and impartial trial.