FIFTH SECTION
CASE OF CRITES AND RABINOVITZ v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC
(Application no. 54651/20)
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGMENT
 
STRASBOURG
20 June 2024
 
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Crites and Rabinovitz v. the Czech Republic,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
 Mārtiņš Mits, President,
 María Elósegui,
 Kateřina Šimáčková, judges,
and Martina Keller, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to:
the application (no. 54651/20) against the Czech Republic lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 1 December 2020 by two American nationals, Ms Alice Crites and Mr Michael Rabinovitz (“the applicants”), who were born in 1963 and 1960 respectively, live in Bethesda and were represented by Mr M. Kojan, a lawyer practising in Prague;
the decision to give notice of the complaint concerning the right of access to the Constitutional Court to the Czech Government (“the Government”), represented by their Agent, Mr P. Konůpka, of the Ministry of Justice, and to declare inadmissible the remainder of the application;
the parties’ observations;
Having deliberated in private on 30 May 2024,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
1. The case concerns the applicants’ lack of access to the Constitutional Court which erred by not having reviewed the decisions of the lower courts that the applicants challenged before it (Article 6 of the Convention). 2. In 2014 the applicants’ predecessor brought a pecuniary claim of approximately 1,550 euros (EUR) before the domestic courts; a much higher amount was sought from the same defendant by other claimants. Later, the applicants were allowed to replace their predecessor on the claimant side, and their claim was granted in a very small part and dismissed for the remainder. 3. In April 2020 the applicants filed a constitutional appeal, complaining of a breach of their right to a fair trial and to respect for property. 4. Although the amount of the applicants’ claim, considered separately from the other co-claimants, was lower than the financial limit allowing for an appeal on points of law (that is to say, approximately EUR 1,960 pursuant to Article 238 § 1 (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure), the Constitutional Court rejected the applicants’ constitutional appeal for non-exhaustion of all domestic remedies, stating without any further explanation that they should have filed an appeal on points of law with the Supreme Court (decision no. I. ÚS 1193/20 of 26 May 2020, served on the applicants’ lawyer on 3 June 2020).

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