U-I-479/18, Up-469/15

Reference no.:
U-I-479/18, Up-469/15
The principle of trust in the law determined by Article 2 of the Constitution ensures individuals that the time in which the state may interfere with their rights due to a minor offence they have allegedly committed is limited. The time limit must be clearly and precisely defined by law. Due to the fact that the Minor Offences Act fails to define a time limit as regards the duration of the procedure in which a new assessment is carried out following the abrogation of the final decision on the minor offence, it is inconsistent with Article 2 of the Constitution. The court departed from the established case law of the Supreme Court regarding the time limit for absolute time-barring following the abrogation of a final court decision and failed to substantiate such conduct. By so doing, it arbitrarily departed from the established case law, which violates the right determined by Article 22 of the Constitution. Due to the fact that the complainant would be unable to improve his legal position despite the established violation of the right determined by Article 22 of the Constitution, the Constitutional Court did not abrogate the challenged judgment but merely established in the reasoning of its decision that this right was violated. 
Document in PDF:
Type of procedure:
review of constitutionality and legality of regulations and other general acts constitutional complaint
Type of act:
statute individual act
Sebastjan Marčič, Bistrica ob Dravi
Date of application:
Date of decision:
Type of decision adopted:
Outcome of proceedings:
establishment – it is inconsistent with the Constitution/statute dismissal