CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 6 novembre 2024

.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 } Published on 25 November 2024   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 20342/23 Vladislav VĚTROVEC against the Czech Republic lodged on 16 May 2023 communicated on 6 November 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE In the criminal proceedings against him the applicant was found guilty of mismanagement of another’s property and ordered by the appellate court to pay damages to a civil party. His application concerns in particular the failure of the Constitutional Court to communicate to him written observations submitted in reaction to his constitutional appeal against the appellate court’s decision by the regional prosecutor and the civil party, as a result of which he was unable to comment on them. On 18 January 2023 his constitutional appeal was dismissed by the Constitutional Court (no. I. ÚS 3416/22), whose reasoning appears to be partly based on the arguments submitted in particular by the prosecutor in his observations. The applicant also complains about a breach of the principle of immediacy by the appellate court and about the unforeseeability and insufficient reasoning of the latter’s decision (Article 6 § 1 of the Convention). QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the applicant have a fair hearing before the Constitutional Court, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, was the fairness of those proceedings undermined by the non-communication to the applicant of observations submitted by the parties intervening in the proceedings and the consequent lack of opportunity for him to comment on them (see Janáček v. the Czech Republic , § 53, no. 9634/17, 2   February 2023)?