Constitutional Court

According to Article 16, paragraph 1 of the applicable Rules of the Constitutional Court of BiH, the time limit to file an appeal is 60 days. In the event that the 60^th day is a Sunday, the appeal may be filed the following day.²⁹⁵⁴ The time limit is of preclusive nature and cannot be extended. So an appeal which has been filed after the prescribed time limit, if only of one day, shall be treated as an appeal which has been filed much after the expiry of the time limit.²⁹⁵⁵

The 60-day time limit applies both to an appeal and the supplement to an appeal. As to the submission of new facts, this rule does not apply if they are submitted within a time limit of 60 days after that party was informed of the fact. Furthermore, a timely filed appeal does not stay the 60-day time limit, since that time limit may not be regarded as a time limit to announce the appeal (Beschwerdeankündigung). Therefore, the 60-day time limit serves to prepare the appeal on a point of fact and law and to deliver it.²⁹⁵⁶

Taking into account the legal system, the time limit to file an appeal depends also on the requirements for the exhaustion of effective legal remedies. In particular, the time limit starts running on the date of the delivery of the decision on the final legal remedy used, within the meaning of Article 16, paragraph 1 of the Rules of the BiH Constitutional Court, whereby a particular case is completed.²⁹⁵⁷ Therefore, it is necessary to establish in every particular case which legal remedies can be regarded as “effective” and whether they have been exhausted. The 60-day time limit may be determined based on this.²⁹⁵⁸

It follows from the aforementioned reasoning that a decision on an “ineffective” legal remedy cannot be regarded as the restarting point of the 60-day time limit.²⁹⁵⁹ Quite the contrary applies if the appellant, in accordance with the law, is denied the first-instance proceedings which would enable him/her to challenge an administrative act.²⁹⁶⁰ In that case, it would be logical that a court decision (mostly a ruling), whereby an action against a general act has been rejected for lack of jurisdiction, does not stop the 60-day time limit from running. Therefore, an action brought to the Court based on the law itself is a manifestly inadmissible legal remedy, which is the reason why it could not be considered effective.²⁹⁶¹ However, in that case, the appeal may be regarded as an appeal of the deprivation of judicial protection. It is not primarily directed against the challenged administrative act but against a court decision whereby judicial protection has been denied in an unconstitutional manner.²⁹⁶² The 60- day time limit starts running again at the moment of its delivery. In that case, ordinary courts, by directly applying the rights and freedoms under the ECHR, would have to allow the use of a legal remedy regardless of the restrictions prescribed by the positive regulations. In Case No. U 19/00, the Constitutional Court, in accordance with this conclusion, ordered the Supreme Court of the Republika Srpska to declare an action admissible and to take a decision on the merits of the case.²⁹⁶³

Therefore the appellant can be required to exhaust only the effective legal remedies. The appellant bears the burden of proving that a legal remedy is not effective. If the Constitutional Court finds that a legal remedy is not effective, but despite this fact the appellant pursues it without a successful outcome, the decision on such a legal remedy does not interrupt the running of the time limit.²⁹⁶⁴ It follows that in general the appellant bears the consequences of its own wrong assessment of the effectiveness of the legal remedy used, unless his/ her assessment constitutes an “excessive burden imposed on the appellant”.²⁹⁶⁵

As a rule, the time limit is determined through a delivery slip. If the appellant refuses to sign the delivery slip on the so-called final decision (with the purpose of manipulating the time limit), that day shall nevertheless be taken as the starting date.²⁹⁶⁶ If it is impossible to determine the date of delivery of the final decision, the time limit shall start running on the date or moment when the appellant was informed of the violation of his/her rights.²⁹⁶⁷