Constitutional Court

KI18/18, Isuf Musliu, Request for constitutional review of the length of proceedings in case C.No. 296/16 being conducted before the Basic Court in Prishtina – Branch in Lipjan.

KI18/18, Resolution on Inadmissibility of 30 May 2018, published on 13 June 2018

Key words: Individual referral, length of proceedings, retrial, referral manifestly ill-founded

 The Applicant filed a claim with the Basic Court in Prishtina –Branch in Lipjan, for annulment of the contract on gift concluded between F.M., on one the hand, and H. M., A.M. and A.M. on the other, regarding a number of cadastral parcels in the village of Petrashtica, Municipality of Shtime. The Basic Court, by Judgment C. No. 210/11, rejected as ungrounded the Applicant’s claim. Upon the appeal of the Applicant, the Court of Appeals by Decision CA. No. 3781/2013 annulled Judgment C. No. 210/11 of the Basic Court, and remanded the case for retrial to the Basic Court.

The Applicant complains about the length of proceedings before the regular courts, especially with regard to the proceedings before the Basic Court, which raises issue of his right to a fair and impartial trial. In this regard he claims that the case has not been solved for many years and that the Basic Court is not holding retrial, nor it allows to transfer this case to another court

The Constitutional Court found that the entire period of length of the proceedings before the regular courts of 6 (six) years and six months, cannot not be considered unreasonable, given the complexity of the case, the conduct of the parties and what was at stake for the Applicant. Therefore, the Court finds that the Applicant did not substantiate his allegation that there has been a violation of the right to determination of his rights and obligations within a reasonable time, as it is guaranteed by Article 31 (2) of the Constitution and Article 6 (1) of ECHR.