CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 septembre 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 4 October 2021   FIRST SECTION Application no. 6251/20 Milan KIAČEK against Slovakia lodged on 23 January 2020 communicated on 13 September 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the issue of non-communication to the applicant of the observations of a third party in reply to his constitutional complaint in the proceedings before the Constitutional Court. Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant complains of a violation of his right to a fair hearing, arguing that the proceedings were not adversarial and fell short of the principle of equality of arms. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of his civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article   6 §   1 of the Convention? In particular, given the fact that in the proceedings before the Constitutional Court a third party submitted their observations in reply to the applicant’s constitutional complaint and that these observations were not communicated to the applicant, was the principle of adversarial trial and equality of arms respected (see, mutatis mutandis , Trančíková v. Slovakia , no. 17127/12, §   39, 13 January 2015; BENet Praha, spol. s r.o. v. the Czech Republic , no.   33908/04, §§ 137-146, 24 February 2011; and Milatová and Others v.   the Czech Republic , no. 61811/00, §§ 59 and 65, ECHR 2005 ‑ V)?