THIRD SECTION
CASE OF IBRAHIMI AND OTHERS v. ALBANIA
(Applications nos. 81057/17 and 4 others – see appended list)
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGMENT
 
STRASBOURG
14 January 2025
 
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Ibrahimi v. Albania,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
 Lətif Hüseynov, President,
 Darian Pavli,
 Úna Ní Raifeartaigh, judges,
and Olga Chernishova, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to:
the applications against the Republic of Albania lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by the applicants listed in the appended table, (“the applicants”), on the various dates indicated therein;
the decision to give notice of the complaints concerning the applicants’ right of access to the Constitutional Court, as well as the applicant’s right to participate in person in the criminal proceedings against him, and defend himself though legal assistance of his own choosing at a hearing held before the Supreme Court in the application no. 81057/17, and the applicant company’s right to participate in the proceedings before the Tirana District Court in the application no. 7386/22 to the Albanian Government (“the Government”) represented by their Agent, Mr O. Moçka, State Advocate General, and to declare inadmissible the remainder of the applications;
the parties’ observations;
the comments submitted by Res Publica who were granted leave to intervene by the President of the Section, and the applicant’s observations in reply to the third-party submissions;
Having deliberated in private on 3 December 2024,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
1. The cases at issue concern various proceedings before domestic courts in which the applicants lodged their constitutional complaints against decisions of the Supreme Court adopted in their respective cases. In all cases the Constitutional Court declared the applicants’ constitutional complaints inadmissible as lodged out of the four-month time-limit, counting from the date the contested Supreme Court’s decisions had been adopted, and not from the date the applicants had effectively learned of them. 2. In applications nos. 57542/18, 32939/21, 54121/21 and 7386/22, the Constitutional Court held that any time a party sought that a decision be served to it, a court that had issued the decision in question would put a stamp on it, and that such a stamp could not serve as decisive proof of the date the contested decision had first been served on a party. The Constitutional Court considered that it was on the party to prove that it had not been served with the contested decision on an earlier date. Ibrahimi v. Albania, no. 81057/17
3. The case concerns the criminal proceedings against the applicant in which he was convicted to fifteen years’ imprisonment for murder. In these proceedings the Supreme Court adopted its decision on 25 June 2015. On 12 May 2017 a letter of the Supreme Court, notifying the applicant of its decision, was served on the applicant by the prison authorities. 4. The applicant’s constitutional complaint lodged on 5 June 2017, in which he complained about the violation of his right to be informed of a hearing before the Supreme Court and his right to legal assistance, was declared inadmissible by the Constitutional Court on 16 June 2017, as being lodged out of time, counting from the date the Supreme Court’s decision had been adopted. Selimi v. Albania, no. 57542/18
5. The case concerns a property dispute in which the applicants were parties. In these proceedings the Supreme Court adopted its decision on 25 June 2015. It was served on the applicants on 18 October 2017. The applicants lodged a constitutional complaint on 13 February 2018. On 30 May 2018 the Constitutional Court declared it inadmissible as lodged out of the four-month time-limit, counted from the date the contested Supreme Court’s decision had been adopted. Nika v. Albania, no. 32939/21
6. The case concerns the proceedings before domestic courts in which the applicant challenged her dismissal from work as an inspector in the Forestry Directorate of Shkodër. In these proceedings the Supreme Court adopted its decision on 27 May 2020. It was served on the applicant on 14 January 2021. The applicant lodged a constitutional complaint on 18 January 2021. On 26 February 2021 the Constitutional Court declared it inadmissible as lodged out of the four-month time-limit, counted from the date the contested Supreme Court’s decision had been adopted. Dedaj v. Albania, no. 54121/21
7. The case concerns the proceedings before domestic courts in which the applicant challenged his dismissal from work. In these proceedings the Supreme Court adopted its decision on 27 July 2020. It was served on the applicant on 1 April 2021. The applicant lodged a constitutional complaint on 9 June 2021. On 26 July 2021 the Constitutional Court declared it inadmissible as lodged out of the four-month time-limit, counted from the date the contested Supreme Court’s decision had been adopted. Industri Ndërtim (IN) SH.P.K. v. Albania, no. 7386/22
8. The case concerns civil proceedings related to the applicant company’s contractual obligations. In these proceedings the Supreme Court adopted its decision on 17 February 2021. It was served on the applicant company on 4 June 2021. The applicant company lodged a constitutional complaint on 29 September 2021. On 29 October the Constitutional Court declared it inadmissible as lodged out of the four-month time-limit, counted from the date the contested Supreme Court’s decision had been adopted.

Article of the Convention at issue: Article 6
Outcome: violation