Constitutional Court

KI32/18 Applicant: J.S.C. „Kosovik“, constitutional review of Judgment AC-I-17-0469 of the Appellate Panel of the Special Chamber of the Supreme Court on Privatization Agency of Kosovo Related Matters of 26 October 2017

KI32/18, Resolution on Inadmissibility of 11 December 2018, published on 28 January 2018

Keywords: legal person, individual referral, constitutional review of the challenged judgment  of the Special Chamber of the Supreme Court, manifestly ill-founded

The Referral is based on Article 21.4 and 113.7 of the Constitution, Article 47 of the Law No. 03/L-121 on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kosovo, and Rule 29 of the Rules of Procedure of the Constitutional Court.

The Applicant is a company, which was founded in April 1992 as a socially owned-enterprise.

After the establishment of the Privatization Agency of Kosovo (hereinafter: the PAK), the PAK initiated the liquidation procedure of the Applicant.

The Applicant submitted the statement of claim to the Specialized Panel of the Special Chamber of the Supreme Court on the Privatization Agency of Kosovo Related Matters (hereinafter: the Specialized Panel), requesting confirmation of its status as a private company, which is not under the administration of PAK, annulment of the decision on liquidation, as well as the imposition of interim measure.

The Specialized Panel rejected the Applicant’s claim as ungrounded considering that the Applicant had not met the requirements for the transition from a socially-owned to a private enterprise.

The Appellate Panel upheld the Judgment of the Specialized Panel.

The Applicant claims that the regular courts have erroneously deermined the facts and erroneously interpreted the law, which caused a violation of Article 31 and 46 of the Constitution, as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the ECHR.

The Court notes that the Applicant did not substantiate by evidence that the challenged decisions violated his rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and the ECHR.

The Court considers that the Applicant did not present facts indicating that the decisions of the regular courts caused in any way a constitutional violation of his rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Therefore, the Court considers tha on constitutional basis, the Referral is manifestly ill-founded and is to be declared inadmissible.