Constitutional Court

KI18/17, Applicant: Isuf Bajrami, constitutional review of Decision AC-II-14-0135 of the Appellate Panel of the Special Chamber of the Supreme Court on Privatization Agency of Kosovo Related Matters of 20 October 2016

 KI18/17, Resolution on Inadmissibility, adopted on 19 April 2018, published on 30 May 2018

Keywords: individual referral, civil procedure, property dispute, equality before the law, right to fair trial, protection of property, judicial protection of rights, out of time referral

The Applicant alleges that the Decision [AC-I-14-0135] of 25 October 2016 of the Appellate Panel of the SCSC violated his rights guaranteed by Article 24 [Equality Before the Law], Article 31 [Right to Fair and Impartial Trial], Article 46 [Protection of Property], Article 54 [Judicial Protection of Rights] and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Applicant before the regular courts requested confirmation of the property rights over several contested immovable properties, which he claimed to have been taken from his predecessors from 1948 until 1995 during the agrarian reform process. The Applicant initially filed a claim with the Special Chamber of the Supreme Court, against the Municipality of Gjilan, AIC “Agrokultura” in Gjilan and the Agricultural Cooperative in Zhegër. The latter had declared itself incompetent and sent the case to the Municipal Court in Gjilan for review, which rejected the Applicant’s claim. The Judgment of the Municipal Court in Gjilan was finally upheld by the Appellate Panel of the SCSC, by the Decision [AC-I-14-0135] of 25 October 2016. Against this Decision, the Applicant filed a “request for revision” with the Appellate Panel of SCSC, which rejected as inadmissible the Applicant’s request for revision.

After assessing the case in its entirety, the Court found that the Applicant had in fact filed a legal remedy, which was not lawful. For this reason, the Court, as a final decision and on the issue of counting the deadline, rendered Judgment [AC-II-12-0070] of the Appellate Panel of 27 March 2014, and concluded that since its service over 2 years have passed. In conclusion, the Court concluded that the Referral was not filed within the legal time limit established in Article 49 of the Law and Rule 36 (1) (c) of the Rules of Procedure.