CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 novembre 2021

.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 } .sB6ED799D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 20 December 2021   THIRD SECTION Applications nos. 41373/21 and 48801/21 Astrit MELI against Albania and SWINKELS FAMILY BREWERS N.V. against Albania lodged on 30 July 2021 and 1 October 2021 respectively communicated on 30 November 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE Applications nos. 41373/21 and 48801/21 concern the alleged non ‑ examination of some of the applicants’ constitutional complaints on the merits on account of the Constitutional Court’s failure to reach the required statutory majority of five judges as well as the Constitutional Court’s failure to provide sufficient reasons for subsequently rejecting the complaints. Application no. 41371/21 also concerns the allegedly unreasonable length of proceedings before the Constitutional Court which took 3 years, 4 months and 26 days to examine the constitutional appeal. The constitutional complaints concerned an alleged failure of the lower courts to give reasoned decisions and, as regards application no. 41371/21, an alleged breach of the principle of equality of arms. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES COMMON QUESTIONS 1.     Has there been a breach of the applicants’ right of access to court as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, did the Constitutional Court examine the applicants’ complaints about the alleged failure of the lower courts to give reasoned decisions and, as regards application no. 41373/21, the alleged breach of the principle of equality of arms on the merits (compare with Marini v. Albania , no.   3738/02, §§ 121-22, 18 December 2007, and Avdić and Others v.   Bosnia and Herzegovina , nos.   28357/11 and 2 others, §§ 36-37, 19   November 2013)? 2.     Did the Constitutional Court’s decisions contain sufficient reasons for rejecting the applicants’ complaints about the alleged failure of the lower courts to give reasoned decisions and, as regards application no.   41373/21, the alleged breach of the principle of equality of arms, as required by Article   6 § 1 of the Convention? 3.     Did the lower courts’ decisions contain sufficient reasons, as required by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? QUESTIONS SPECIFIC TO APPLICATION NO. 41373/21 4.     Has the applicant exhausted all available domestic remedies in respect of his complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the allegedly unreasonable length of proceedings before the Constitutional Court? In particular, was the applicant required to lodge an action under section 71/ç of the Constitutional Court Organisation   Act? The parties are invited to submit relevant domestic case-law on the application and interpretation of that statutory provision by the Constitutional Court. 5.     Without prejudice to the preceding question, has there been a breach of the reasonable-time requirement under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention in respect of the length of proceedings before the Constitutional Court? 6.     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, was the principle of equality of arms and the principle of adversarial proceedings respected in the domestic proceedings?   APPENDIX   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Applicant Company Year of Registration Place of Registered office Represented by 1. 41373/21 Meli v. Albania 30/07/2021 Astrit MELI 1959 Tirana Albanian     2. 48801/21 Swinkels Family Brewers N.V. v. Albania 01/10/2021   SWINKELS FAMILY BREWERS N.V. 1930 Lieshout, Netherlands   Krenar LOLOCI