Constitutional Court

KI14/20, Applicant: Armend Thaqi, Constitutional review of Decision Rev. no. 425/2019 of the Supreme Court of Kosovo, of 10 December 2019 

KI14/20, Resolution on Inadmissibility, of 15 April 2020, published on 4 May 2020

Keywords: individual referral, compensation of damage, return to the previous situation, manifestly ill founded referral

The Applicant had suffered an accident at the premises of Company “I” in Ferizaj (where he had gone to buy vehicle tires) on which occasion he allegedly suffered bodily injuries. The Applicant had filed a claim with the Basic Court in Ferizaj (hereinafter: the Basic Court) against the Company “I” in, for compensation of damage suffered as a result of the aforementioned accident.

The Basic Court, by Judgment C.no.795/15, decided to consider the Applicant’s claim withdrawn as neither the Applicant (in the capacity of the claimant) nor his representative, despite being duly notified, had not participated in the main trial in connection with the claim ( 21 March 2019, at 9:00h) and had not justified their absence.

The Applicant’s representative had proposed a return to the previous situation. The Basic Court, through Judgment C.nr.795/15, rejected the proposal for return to the previous situation on the grounds that the legal conditions for the rejection of the request for return to the previous situation had been met. This decision was confirmed by the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.

The Applicant alleged before the Constitutional Court that the regular courts, by failing to make possible for him the return them to the previous situation, had violated his rights guaranteed by Articles 31 [Right to Fair and Impartial Trial] and 54 [Judicial Protection of Rights], of the Constitution, in conjunction with Article 6 (Right to a fair trial), of the ECHR.

After having examined the allegations, the Court found that the Applicant had not presented facts indicating that the proceedings in the regular courts have in any way violated his constitutional rights. Consequently, the Court decided that the Referral was manifestly ill founded on constitutional basis and should be declared inadmissible.