Constitutional Court

The Applicants allege that the District Court in the second appeal, and the Supreme Court in the Revision, violated their rights to a fair and impartial trial as guaranteed by Article 31 of the Constitution and Article 6, para, 1, of the European Convention on Human Rights, As a consequence of the courts’ interpretation, the Applicants allege that the civil panel that adjudicated their case was neither independent nor impartial, The Applicants argue that they have a right to compensation for the death of their family member, The Applicants request the Constitutional Court to make an accurate assessment of the liability of the Municipal Public Company for Sport Marketing, and eliminate the violations of material law allegedly committed by the District and Supreme Courts, The Applicants request recognition of their right to compensation for their moral suffering, Thus, the Court considers that there is no evidence showing that the regular courts hearing the case lacked impartiality or that the proceedings were otherwise unfair, Therefore, the Constitutional Court finds that the Applicants’ claims have not been substantiated and must be rejected as ungrounded