Constitutional Court

KI130/18, Applicant: Limak Kosovo International Airport J.S.C. “Adem Jashari”, Constitutional review of Judgment Rev. No. 53/2018 of the Supreme Court of Kosovo of 6 June 2018

KI130/18, Resolution of 20 June 2019, published on 12 July 2019

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

The Applicant and the Government of the Republic of Kosovo signed a Public-Private Partnership Agreement (PPP), and based on this agreement the Applicant assumed an obligation to keep all employees in the employment relationship for another 3 (three) years.

Consequently, the Applicant notified the employee F.M. that she will not be offered a new employment contract after the expiration of the existing contract based on the company’s decision on future human resource planning. The employee F.M. filed a lawsuit in the Basic Court and her lawsuit is approved as grounded based on the provisions of the Collective Agreement. The Judgment of the Basic Court is upheld by the Court of Appeals. The Applicant in the revision alleged that the Collective Agreement does not apply to his case because they have not signed it. Finally, in the course of the revision procedure, and the response to the Applicant’s allegations, the Supreme Court reasons that the subject of review was the legality of the non-extension of the employment contract, therefore the question whether or not the Collective Agreement applies in the Applicant’s case will not influence the court to render a different decision.

The Applicant, in his Referral to the Constitutional Court, alleges a violation of Article 31 of the Constitution due to an unreasoned decision as well as Articles 24, 32 and 46 of the Constitution and reiterated his allegations as before the regular courts.

The Constitutional Court, addressing the Applicant’s allegations, found that the latter failed to submit evidence, facts and arguments 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 did not enter the examination of the Applicants’ further allegations because violations of the other rights guaranteed by Articles 24, 32 and 46 of the Constitution are alleged as a result of the violation of the right to fair and impartial trial.