CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 27 mai 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Communicated on 27 May 2020 Published on 15 June 2020   THIRD SECTION Application no. 33160/17 Daniel LIPŠIC against Slovakia lodged on 3 May 2017 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged unfairness of the proceedings before the Constitutional Court (file no. I. ÚS 689/2014). Invoking Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant complains that he was not informed of the proceedings before the Constitutional Court initiated by a private party who had previously lost a civil dispute with the applicant before the ordinary courts. He complains that he could not participate in those proceedings, eventually leading to the quashing of a final judgment in his favour, which had a direct impact on his civil rights and obligations. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of his civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, did he have an opportunity to participate effectively, in line with the principles of equality of arms, adversarial trial and legal certainty, in the proceedings before the Constitutional Court, and to influence their outcome (see, mutatis mutandis , López Guió v. Slovakia , no. 10280/12, §§   101-113, 3 June 2014; Frisancho Perea v. Slovakia , no. 383/13, §§   71 ‑ 78, 21 July 2015; Hudáková and Others v. Slovakia , no. 23083/05, §§   25-27, 27 April 2010; Čičmanec v. Slovakia , no. 65302/11, §§ 56-65, 28   June 2016)?