Constitutional Court

 KI62/18, Applicant: Nadlije Gojani, constitutional review of Decision No. AC-I-17-0505 of the Appellate Panel of the Special Chamber of the Supreme Court of Kosovo on Privatization Agency of Kosovo Related Matters, of 5 March 2018

KI62/18, Resolution on Inadmissibility of 27 September 2018, published on 23 October 2018

Keywords: individual referral, compensation of personal income, access to justice, court fees, manifestly ill-founded referral

The Applicant filed a claim with the Municipal Court in Gjakova against Sh. A. “Ereniku” from Gjakova, requesting compensation for personal income as a result of her dismissal from work since 1 May 1992. The Specialized Panel, upon receipt of the case from the Municipal Court, by Decision C-II.-13- 0102-C0001, decided inter alia that the proceeding concerning the Applicant’s case is suspended, as the Socially-Owned Enterprise is in the liquidation procedure. Following the appeal filed by the Applicant, the Appellate Panel, by Decision No. AC-I-17-0505, found that the Applicant’s appeal against the Decision of the Specialized Panel (C-II.-13-0102-C0001) is considered withdrawn as the Applicant did not pay the court fee.

The Applicant alleges before the Constitutional Court violation of her rights guaranteed by Articles 21 [General Principles], 22 [Direct Applicability of International Agreements and Instruments], 31 [Right to Fair and Impartial Trial], 53 [Interpretation of Human Rights Provisions], 46 [Protection of Property] and 54 [Judicial Protection of Rights] of the Constitution, as well as Article 6 (Right to a fair trial) of the ECHR. More specifically, the Applicant alleged that she was denied the right of access to justice as a part of the right to a fair trial due to incorrect application of the law by the Appellate Panel, stating that the request of the Appellate Panel to pay the court fee within 15 days regarding the appeal filed with the Appellate Panel is unlawful because the Administrative Instruction No. 1/2017 on Unification of Judicial Fees of the Kosovo Judicial Council was incorrectly interpreted.

The Court considered that the Applicant did not present any evidence, facts or arguments that indicate that the proceedings before the Appellate Panel presented in any way a constitutional violation of her rights guaranteed by the Constitution, which the Applicant referred to. Therefore, the Constitutional Court concluded that, pursuant to Article 113.7 of the Constitution, Article 48 of the Law, and Rule 39 (2) of the Rules of Procedure, the Applicant’s Referral was manifestly ill-founded.