CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 29 avril 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 29 April 2019   FIRST SECTION Application no. 54022/18 Libor NĚMEČEK against the Czech Republic lodged on 8 November 2018 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant lodged a constitutional complaint against earlier decisions issued in his case. He also raised an objection of bias with respect to two different judges of the Constitutional Court, sitting in the chamber to which his case was assigned. The application concerns an alleged violation of the right of access to a court and the right to have the case heard by an impartial tribunal on account of the alleged failure of the Constitutional Court to address one of the objections of bias raised by the applicant (Article 6 § 1 of the Convention).     QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the Constitutional Court’s alleged failure to address the objection of bias raised by the applicant against one of the judges sitting in the chamber deciding on the applicant’s constitutional complaint amounted to a violation of the applicant’s right of access to a court (see Pelevin v. Ukraine , no.   24402/02, §§ 28-32, 20 May 2010; Kardoš v. Croatia , no. 25782/11, §§   57-58, 26 April 2016; Šimecki v. Croatia , no. 15253/10, §§   46-48, 30   April   2014)?   2.     Has the Constitutional Court’s alleged failure to address the objection of bias raised by the applicant against one of the judges sitting in the chamber deciding on the applicant’s constitutional complaint amounted to a violation of the applicant’s right to have his case heard by an impartial tribunal (see Mežnarić v. Croatia , no. 71615/01, § 27, 15 July 2005)?