Key facts of the case:
The Constitutional Court reviewed a complaint of the Applicant. The Applicant first filed an action in the district court against the defendants seeking a declaration that she has the easement right to remain in the house in H. Applicant claimed that she acquired a right to stay for a lifetime in a family house upon an informal agreement with J.K. (one of heirs who died in 2004). At the time of the inheritance agreement (1979), however, the Civil Code did not allow for the possibility of enduring rights corresponding to an easement, therefore all relevant courts did not accept the possibility to endure this right by the Applicant. Such a commitment had only personal character, and after the death of J. K. in 2004, necessarily ceased to exist, and it could not be transferred to the legal successor (defendant 1). Complaint in this case alleges infringement of fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, under Article 46.1 in connection with Article 1, 47. 2 and 48.2; and Articles 36.1, 37.3, 38.2 of the Constitutional Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms (In Slovak it is “Listina”, also the Charter), and Article 47 of the Charter, as well as rights under Art. 6.1 and 14 of the ECHR, by the judgements of Senica District Court, Trnava Regional Court and by the procedure of the Supreme Court. The Applicant argues that general courts dismissed her declaratory action (about enduring property), without the need to undertake a necessary evidence. Their decisions are, therefore, in her view, premature and unconvincing and finally arbitrary.
In relation to the alleged infringement of rights under Art. 47 of Charter the Constitutional Court also found necessary to highlight that this legal instrument is not applicable to the applicant's case. From the wording of Art. 51.1 of Charter as well as pursuant to the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (eg, judgment of 13 June 1989 in Case 5/88, ECR. 1989. p. 2609, or judgment of 18 December 1997 in Case C-309/96 Annibaldi Coll. 1997. p. I-7493) it is clear that Member States' obligation to respect the rights defined in European Union law is binding for the Member States only when they undertake action within the scope of the European Union law. Based on above Constitutional Court concluded that there is not such causal link between alleged judgment of the Supreme Court and the fundamental rights under the Constitution, Convention and the Charter, that would suggest a real opportunity to express their possible violation after receipt of the complaint for further proceedings.