Constitutional Appeal before the Constitutional Court and ECtHR

The case generated two constitutional appeals: that of Bilbao (A.30) and this one, of the tax front. Their fates were identical; their comparison, instructive.

The brief

• Filed on 11 September 2019 before the Constitutional Court, by Apolozan's legal representation.
• Object: the resolutions of the 2019 Alicante circuit — the grant-dismissal turn of the Provincial Court (A.47) and the dismissal based on the denounced party's reports (A.48).
• Rights invoked: effective judicial protection and a trial with guarantees (Article 24 of the Constitution), against the cross-border patrimonial enforcement processed without a hearing (A.41).

The result

Non-admission by the formula of the constitutional-appeal regime: failure to justify the special constitutional significance — with no examination of the merits. With this avenue exhausted, the antecedents of the front were elevated to the European jurisdiction, where they are on record as filed since 25 May 2020.

The parallel it completes

Two fronts — criminal of Bilbao and tax of Alicante —, two constitutional appeals in due time and form, two formal non-admissions without merits (A.31 and this one). The constitutional filter operated twice on the same case with an identical result: the documentary questions — registry on one front, expert on the other — remained unexamined in their last internal instance too.

How to verify it

Read the prayer for relief of the appeal and the formula of the non-admission. Repeat with A.30 and A.31. The symmetry of the four documents is the datum.