Constitutional Court

The Applicant filed a Referral pursuant to Article 113.7 of the Constitution, asserting that her right to work and exercise her profession under Article 49 were infringed by a decision of the Special Chamber of the Supreme Court concerning her claim to a 20% share of the proceeds of the privatization of a company where she worked for 17 years, Despite the fact that she was not listed as an employee when the privatization notification was made, she argued that she was nonetheless eligible for a share pursuant to UNMIK Regulation 2003/13’s exception in cases involving discrimination. Her appeal to the Special Chamber was still pending when the Referral was submitted, The Court held that the Referral was premature and inadmissible pursuant to Articles 113.1 and 113.7 of the Constitution because the Applicant’s appeal to the Supreme Court was still pending, reflecting that she had failed to comply with the prerequisite of exhaustion of all legal remedies