Communicated on 6 September 2019
SECOND SECTION
Applications nos. 58014/16 and 28142/17
Natasha NOKSHIQI against Albania
and Mustafa LACI against Albania
lodged on 30 September 2016 and 3 April 2017 respectively
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
Application no. 58014/16: The application concerns an alleged breach of the applicant’s right of access to court under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention on account of her inability to pay the fees for court-appointed experts. The domestic courts decided to dismiss her claim for damages following the withdrawal of the applicant’s claim.
Application no. 28142/17: The application concerns an alleged breach of the applicant’s right of access to court under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention on account of the first-instance administrative court’s refusal to examine the merits of applicant’s claim for damages as a result of his failure to pay the court fees which are determined as a percentage of the claim. An appeal on points of law has been pending before the Supreme Court since 22 January 2018.
QUESTIONS IN RESPECT OF APPLICATION NO. 58014/16
1. Has the applicant exhausted all effective domestic remedies as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention? In particular:
(a) Did the national legal framework at the relevant time, as interpreted and applied by national courts, provide for an exemption from the payment of expert fees?
(b) If so, was there an effective system in place for applying and granting such exemption?
The Government are requested to submit domestic case-law and administrative practice in support of their arguments.
2. Has there been a breach of the applicant’s right of access to court as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (compare with Kreuz v. Poland, no. 28249/95, ECHR 2001‑VI and Georgel and Georgeta Stoicescu v. Romania, no. 9718/03, 26 July 2011)?
QUESTIONS IN RESPECT OF APPLICATION NO. 28142/17
1. Has the applicant exhausted all effective domestic remedies as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, was there an effective system in place for applying for exemption from the payment of court fees under the national legal framework, as interpreted and applied by national courts? The Government are requested to submit domestic courts’ case-law and administrative practice in support of their arguments.
2. Has there been a breach of the applicant’s right of access to court as guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see for example Kreuz v. Poland, no. 28249/95, ECHR 2001‑VI and Georgel and Georgeta Stoicescu v. Romania, no. 9718/03, 26 July 2011)?
3. Was the length of the civil proceedings in the present case in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see for example Luli and Others v. Albania, nos. 64480/09 and 5 others, 1 April 2014)?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy