Enforcement of court decisions which are the exclusive competence of the courts in the Republic of Kosovo
Author | Nehat Idrizi |
Position | Judge at the Court of Appeals in Pristina and Professor at UBT University in Pristina |
Pages | 44-51 |
Vo
l.
6
N
o
. 2
J
u
ly
, 2020
A
cademic Journal o
f
Business,
A
dministration, Law and Social Science
s
II
PCCL Publishin
g
, Graz-
A
ustri
a
I
SSN 2410-391
8
A
cces online at www.ii
p
ccl.or
g
44
Enforcement of court decisions which are the exclusive competence of the
courts in the Republic o
f
Kosov
o
Dr. Sc. N
eha
t
Id
r
i
z
i
J
udge at the Court o
f
A
ppeals in Pristina and Pro
f
essor at
U
BT
U
niversity in Pristina
Ab
str
a
ct
E
nforcement
p
rocedure is the fi nal
p
art and
p
ossibl
y
the most sensible
p
art of the civil
p
rocedure. With the new legal changes, a
p
art from the court as a com
p
etent institution
a
nd authorit
y
, it is also the
p
rivate enforcement agent, a bod
y
which in its work will have
full legal
p
ublic authorit
y
. However, with the new Law on
E
nforcement Procedure of The
R
e
p
ublic of Kosovo (L
E
PRK), for certain cases, the court will be com
p
etent for execution.
I
n this regard, the L
E
P also em
p
hasizes the role of the court in the im
p
lementation of this
p
rocedure so that the realization of the subjective civil rights of the
p
arties in the
p
rocedure
is ex
p
ressed as soon and as fairl
y
as
p
ossible. L
E
P has envisaged in detail the rules and
c
onditions under which the execution can be commenced and
p
erformed, including the
e
nforcement carried out b
y
the
p
rivate enforcement agent. The focus of this
p
a
p
er is onl
y
t
he enforcement for which the court has exclusive
j
urisdiction
.
K
e
y
wor
d
s: creditor, debtor, enforcement document, confi dential document,
p
rivate
e
nforcement a
g
ent.
I
ntr
odu
ct
io
n
T
he new Law on
E
n
f
orcement Procedure (L
E
P) in the Re
p
ublic o
f
Kosovo is considered
as one o
f
the laws which have brought radical changes to the legal en
f
orcement s
y
stem
i
n the area that it regulates, while also incor
p
orating new law institutes o
f
en
f
orcement
which did not exist. These innovations, not rarel
y
, and es
p
eciall
y
at the initial stage o
f
i
ts im
pl
ementation,
h
ave create
d
various
d
i
l
emmas in im
pl
ementation. T
h
us, in t
h
e
j
uris
p
rudence regarding the com
p
etence, there have been di
erent inter
p
retations
that when this law enters into
f
orce
,
creditors are entitled to re
f
er all ma ers back to
the court or the
y
should address the court
f
or en
f
orcement onl
y
on certain ma ers.
H
owever,
A
rticle 5
p
aragra
p
h 2 o
f
this law
p
rovides that “Com
p
etent Court shall
hold the subject ma er jurisdiction to order and to carr
y
out en
f
orcement as well as
to decide on other ma ers during the
p
rocedure
p
ursuant to the
p
rovisions o
f
this
Law, unless other courts and en
f
orcement authorities, res
p
ectivel
y
, have com
p
etence
to order and carr
y
out en
f
orcement as well as to decide on other ma ers during
the
p
rocedure”. There
f
ore, in this regard, it seems that the as
p
ects o
f
the court’s
c
om
p
etence to deal with n en
f
orcement case are clari
fi
ed and limited onl
y
to ma ers
p
ertaining to the two above-mentioned s
p
heres,
f
or which the
f
ocus o
f
this work will
b
e in en
f
orcement o
f
cases which are the exclusive com
p
etence o
f
the court
.
To continue reading
Request your trial