A principled exclusion of the effect of the abrogation of a regulation regarding relations that were decided by a final decision does not apply in cases in which a constitutional complaint against a final individual act that was based on the (subsequently) abrogated regulation was filed in due time, while a constitutional complainant claimed that the (subsequently) abrogated regulation was unconstitutional already in preliminary proceedings before the courts. As the courts based the challenged judgments on the first paragraph of Article 282 of the Civil Procedure Act, which the Constitutional Court abrogated by Decision No. U-I-161/10, dated 9 December 2010 (after the complainant filed a constitutional complaint) due to its inconsistency with the first paragraph of Article 23 of the Constitution, the courts in the case at issue violated the complainant’s right to judicial protection determined in the first paragraph of Article 23 of the Constitution.