CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 11 juillet 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .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 } .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 } Communicated on 11 July 2019   SECOND SECTION Application no. 19889/19 Fatih AKÇEŞME against Turkey lodged on 29 March 2019 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s inability to access the Constitutional Court on account of the dismissal of his individual application for being lodged out of time. The applicant submits in that connection that his lawyer missed the thirty day time-limit to lodge an application owing to the fact that he had a heart-attack. The applicant argues that the Constitutional Court did not examine whether the applicant’s lawyer’s explanations constituted a valid excuse. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right of access to court, guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, as a result of the Constitutional Court’s finding that his constitutional appeal was lodged outside the statutory time limit without responding to his arguments that he had a valid excuse?