Constitutional Court

The Applicant filed a Referral pursuant to Article 113.7 of the Constitution, contending first that the Prizren Municipal Court and the Supreme Court violated rights guaranteed by Articles 31 and 37 when rejecting his property inheritance claims against an aunt and uncle. The Applicant argued that the Municipal Court decision was unjust because the Presiding Judge was allegedly related to other parties, and that the Supreme Court’s decision was unfair because the Court was unaware of relevant facts. Aspects of the property dispute were still pending in the Prizren District Court when the Referral was filed. Second, the Applicant contended that Swedish courts and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) were biased against him when disposing of some family law matters, The Court held that the Referral was inadmissible for three reasons: (1) the property inheritance matter is incompatible ratione temporis with the Constitution and the Law because it involves events occurring prior to when the Constitution was implemented, citing Jasiúnienè vs. Lithuania and “Adler Com” Sh.p.k. vs. Decision of Gjakova; (2) the Applicant failed to exhaust all legal remedies provided by law with respect to the property issue because the matter is apparently pending in a lower court, citing AAB-RIINVEST University L.L.C. vs. Kosovo and Selmouni v. France; and, (3) the family law matter is inadmissible ratione personae because it involves matters beyond the jurisdiction of the Court