Search
Filter results
- Years
- 9
- 47
- 45
- 45
- 66
- 38
- 25
- 35
- 31
- 25
- 36
- 21
- 26
- 21
- 75
- 117
- 48
- 26
- 43
- 25
- 26
- 23
- 21
- 17
- 8
- 7
- 6
- 5
- More
- Stages of the proceedings
- 9
- 6
- 6
- 542
- 347
- 7
- More
- Outcome of the proceedings
- 416
- 123
- 210
- More
- Type of the proceedings
- 446
- 103
- 156
- 212
- More
On Compliance of the Words "Public Mortgage" in Para 1 of Section 400(1) of Civil Procedure Law and of the First and the Third Part of Section 405 with Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2009-93-01
On Compliance of the Second Sentence in Para 7 and the Second Sentence of Para 20 of Transitional Provisions of Law On Judicial Power (in the Wording of the Law of 16 June 2009) with Article 1, Article 83 and Article 107 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2009-111-01
On Compliance of the Words "Public Mortgage" in Para 1 of Section 400(1) of Civil Procedure Law and of the First and the Third Part of Section 405 with Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2009-93-01
On Compliance of Section 16 (10) of Law on Taxes and Fees with Article 1 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: The Term of Reimbursing Overpaid TaxesConstitutional Court held:
1. Section 16 (10) of the Law “On Taxes and Fees” insofar as it applies to tax overpayments accumulated before coming into force of this law, i.e. 1 July 2003, does not comply with Article 1 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
2. Section 16 (10) of the Law “On Taxes and Fees” insofar as it applies to tax overpayments of the Applicant, Limited Liability Company “Industriālais termināls” accumulated before coming into force of this law, does not comply with Article 1 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and is declared as null and void as from the date of adoption of it.
On Compliance of Section 286.14 of Latvian Administrative Violations Code with Article 91 and Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: The Appeal in Cases of Administrative ViolationsConstitutional Court held that the Section 286.14 of the Latvian Administrative Violations Code does comply with Article 91 and Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
On Compliance of the Second Sentence in Para 7 and the Second Sentence of Para 20 of Transitional Provisions of Law On Judicial Power (in the Wording of the Law of 16 June 2009) with Article 1, Article 83 and Article 107 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2009-111-01
On Compliance of Section 5(1) of Law On Payment of State Allowances during the Time Period from 2009 to 2012 with Article 1, Article 91 and Article 110 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2009-110-01
On Compliance of Section 116(1) of Law On the Sentence Execution Code with Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
On Compliance of Section 5(1) of Law On Payment of State Allowances during the Time Period from 2009 to 2012 with Article 1, Article 91 and Article 110 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2009-110-01
On Compliance of Section 19 (5) of Law On Procedures for Coming into Force of the Commercial Law with Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and Article 5 of the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Latvia and the Government of the Kingdom of Denmark concerning the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments
Constitutional Court held that the Section 19 (5) of the Law on Procedures for Coming into Force of the Commercial Law does comply with Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and Article 5 of the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Latvia and the Government of the Kingdom of Denmark concerning the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments.
On Compliance of the Second Sentence in Para 7 and the Second Sentence of Para 20 of Transitional Provisions of Law On Judicial Power (in the Wording of the Law of 16 June 2009) with Article 1, Article 83 and Article 107 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2009-111-01
On Compliance of the Second Sentence of Paragraph 7 and the second sentence of Paragraph 20 (in the wording of 16 June 2009) and the third sentence of Paragraph 20 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law "On Judicial Power" with Articles 1, 83 and 107 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: The Judges' Salaries IIConstitutional Court held:
1. To declare the second sentence and the words of the third sentence “from 1 January 1010 till 31 December 2011 judges’ remuneration shall be set in amount of 73% percent of the remuneration foe work, which has been set in accordance with Paragraph 7 of these Transitional Provisions” of Article 20 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law “On Judicial Power” compatible with Article 1, 83 and 107 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia, if starting with 1 January 2011 the remuneration is set and paid in accordance with Article 1191 of the Law “On Judicial Power”, i.e., in compliance with Judgement of 18 January 2010 by the Constitutional Court in Case No. 2009-11-01.
2. To declare the words of the third sentence of Paragraph 20 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law “On Judicial Power” “without exceeding the remuneration of the Prime Minister, which is defined in accordance with the Law on the Remuneration of Officials and Employees of State and Municipal Institutions” incompatible with Article 1 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and invalid from 1 January 2011.
3. To close proceedings in the part regarding the compatibility of the second sentence of Paragraph 7 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law “On Judicial Power” with Article 1, 83 and 107 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
On Compliance of Section 5(1) of Law On Payment of State Allowances during the Time Period from 2009 to 2012 with Article 1, Article 91 and Article 110 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
On Compliance of Section 2(1) of Law On Payment of State Allowances during the Time Period from 2009 to 2012 with Article 1 and Article 109 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and of Section 3(1) with Article 1, Article 91, Article 105 and Article 109 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
On Compliance of Section 5(1) of Law On Payment of State Allowances during the Time Period from 2009 to 2012 with Article 1, Article 91 and Article 110 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2009-44-01
On Compliance of Para 3 of Transitional Provisions of Law On the Service Pension of State and Local Government Professional Orchestra, Choir, Concert Organisation, Theatre and Circus Artists with Article 91, Article 92 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
On Compliance of Section 141( 1) of Civil Procedure Law, Insofar it Does Not Provide for the Right to Submit an Ancillary Complaint Regarding a Decision on Securing of a Claim with Article 91, Article 92 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2009-85-01
On Compliance of Section 5(1) of Law On Payment of State Allowances during the Time Period from 2009 to 2012 with Article 1, Article 91 and Article 110 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2009-44-01
On Compliance of Section 3(1) of Law On Payment of State Allowances during the Time Period from 2009 to 2012, Insofar It Applies to the State Old-age Pension, with Article 1 and Article 109 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
On Compliance of Section 5(1) of Law On Payment of State Allowances during the Time Period from 2009 to 2012 with Article 1, Article 91 and Article 110 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2009-44-01