Constitutional Court

KI104/20, Applicant, Ejup Koci, Constitutional review of the proceedings before the Basic Court in Mitrovica – Branch in Skenderaj, regarding case C. No. 256/2018

KI104/20, Judgment of 10 February 2021, published 24 March 2021

Keywords: individual referral, violation of Article 31 of the Constitution in conjunction with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights

This case concerns the Applicant’s lawsuit for confirmation of the boundary of the immovable property and confirmation of ownership as an occupied part. The Applicant alleged that the Basic Court was not taking any concrete action to resolve the case.

The Court considers that the Basic Court communicated constantly with the Applicant: (i) notifying him about the current status of his case, (ii) requesting the Applicant to specify the claim and pay the court fee; (iii) deciding that the opposing party be summoned to the hearing and finally (iv) exempting the Applicant from the court fee.

The Court notes that the review of the Applicant’s case in the Basic Court was continuously accompanied by notification and procedural actions by the Basic Court. Based on the facts of the case, the Court notes that the last procedural action of the Basic Court in the present case was the Decision [C. No. 256/2018] of 28 September 2020, by which the Applicant was exempted from the court fee.

In these circumstances, the Court found that the Basic Court was not passive in relation to the Applicant’s case.

Consequently, the Court concludes that the Applicant has not substantiated the allegation that the flow of the procedure on decision regarding his case resulted in the delay and non-resolution of the case within a reasonable time, guaranteed by Article 31.2 of the Constitution and Article 6.1 of the ECHR.

Therefore, the Referral was declared manifestly ill-founded on constitutional basis and was declared inadmissible in accordance with Rule 39 (2) of the Rules of Procedure.