CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 12 juin 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 12 June 2018   SECOND SECTION Application no. 83907/17 Çetina ZAJMI against Albania lodged on 12 December 2017 SUBJECT MATTER OF the CASE The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 about the arbitrary refusal of the Constitutional Court to consider her constitutional complaint. The Supreme Court’s decision was issued on 25 May 2015. At that time, the applicant had a two-year limit to lodge a constitutional appeal. The new law providing a four-month limit for a constitutional complaint entered into force on 1 March 2017. On 26 February 2017 the applicant lodged a constitutional appeal, which was rejected by the Constitutional Court as having been lodged out of time. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES 1.     Was the applicant’s right of access to court, guaranteed by Article 6 §   1 of the Convention, respected in view of the Constitutional Court’s finding that her constitutional appeal was lodged outside the new statutory time-limit (see, for example, Shkalla v. Albania , no. 26866/05, §§ 48-54, 10   May 2011, and Zvolská v. the Czech Republic , no. 46129/99, § 51, ECHR 2002 IX)?