On February 23 RA Constitutional Court delivered a judgment on the application of the founder of “A1+” TV company, “Meltex” LLC, regarding the compliance of Point 1 of Article 204’28 of the RA Civil Procedure Code (“The competences of the court in case of revision”) with the Main Law. As it has been reported, in the application, lodged on August 19, 2009, “A1+” founder stated that the abovementioned Point enables the court to confirm the previous judgment on a case without securing the filed suit on reconsideration on the ground of new circumstances. Namely this provision made a basis for the RA Court of Cassation to decline on February 19, 2009 the demand of “A1+” founder to reconsider the two rulings of the Court of Cassation (of February 27 and April 23, 2004) on suits of “Meltex” LLC versus National Commission on Television and Radio under new circumstances in the case. A new circumstance became the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of June 17, 2008, recognizing the refusals to grant ”A1+” a broadcast license to be a violation of Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, i.e., of the right of the applicant to freely impart information and ideas. At the hearings, started on December 15, 2009, the Constitutional Court mentioned that in September 2009, in another case, Point 1 of Article 204’28 was already recognized contradicting to the Main Law (see YPC Weekly Newsletter, December 11-17, 2009).
At the session of February 23 the Constitutional Court affirmed that Point 1 of Article 204’28 of the RA Civil Procedure Code contradicts the Main Law. According to the delivered judgment, the founder of “A1+” can reapply to the Court of Cassation with the same demand — to reconsider the two court rulings of 2004 on suits of “Meltex” LLC versus NCTR under new circumstances in the case.
