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
- 14
- 3
- 5
- 542
- 346
- 7
- More
- Outcome of the proceedings
- 415
- 123
- 210
- More
- Type of the proceedings
- 445
- 103
- 157
- 212
- More
On Compliance of the Fourth and the Fifth Part of Section 627 of the Criminal Procedure Law with the First Sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
On compliance of Section 56(3), 56(4) and 56(5) of the Law on Institutions of Higher Education with Articles 105, 112 and 113 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
On compliance of the second sentence of Section 631(3) of the Criminal Procedure Law with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
On compliance of Section 56(3), 56(4) and 56(5) of the Law on Institutions of Higher Education with Articles 105, 112 and 113 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court decided:
1. To declare Section 6, Clause 2 of the Law on the Election of Local Government Councils as not conforming to the first sentence of Article 101, Paragraph two of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia.
2. In respect of person J, to declare Section 6, Clause 2 of the Law on the Election of Local Government Councils of the Republic of Latvia as not conforming to the first sentence of Article 101, Paragraph two of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia and void from the moment when the infringement of the fundamental rights of the person concerned occurred.
On Compliance of Section 500 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Law with Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court ruled the following:
to declare Section 500, Paragraph six of the Criminal Procedure Law compatible with Article 92 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia.
-
The provision which does not provide for the right of the accused to become acquainted with the materials of operational activities which are not appended to the criminal case and are related to the object of evidence is compatible with the Constitution
-
A case initiated with respect to a norm that does not envisage the accused person’s right to become acquainted with materials of operational activities which are not appended to the criminal case but are related to the object of evidence
On Compliance of Para 3 of Section 55 of the Law “On Judicial Power” with the First Part of Article 101 and the First Sentence of Article 106 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
On Compliance of Para 2 of Section 7 (4) of the Law on the Procedures for Holding Detained Persons” and Annex 4 to the Cabinet Regulation of 10 January 2006 No. 38 “Regulations regarding Nutritional Provision Norms and Provision Norms of Washing Products and Personal Hygiene Products for Persons Placed in a Short-term Place of Detention” with the Second Sentence of Article 95 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
-
The regulation which does not provide for a detained person to be provided with a pillow and a towel violates the prohibition of cruel and degrading treatment and, accordingly, does not comply with the second sentence of Article 95 of the Constitution
-
A case initiated with respect to norms that do not envisage that a towel and pillow should be provided for a person at a temporary detention facility
On Compliance of Sub-para “c” of Para 14 of Section 1 of the Value Added Tax Law, insofar it Applies to Cases of Compulsory Land Lease, with the First Sentence of Article 91 and the First, Second and Third Sentence of Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2020-24-01
On Compliance of Para 31 of Section 529 (1) and Section 550 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Law with the First Sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court ruled the following:
To recognise Section 529, Paragraph One, Clause 31 and Section 550, Paragraph One of the Criminal Procedure Law, insofar as it relates to the time limit for submitting an appeal in particularly complex and voluminous criminal proceedings, as being compatible with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
On compliance of paragraph 2418 of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No 360 of 9 June 2020 ‘Epidemiological safety measures for the containment of the spread of COVID-19 infection’ (in the wording that was in force from 7 April 2021 until 19 May 2021) with the first sentence of Article 91, the first and the third sentence of Article 105 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2021-24-03
On Compliance of Para 2 of Section 7 1 (1) of the Law on Financing Political Organisations (Parties) with the first sentence of Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court held:
To recognise Para 2 of Section 7 1 (1) of the Law on Financing
Political Organisations (Parties) (in the wording that was in force from
1 January 2020 until 1 January 2022) as being compatible with the first
sentence of Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
On compliance of sub-paragraph 88.2 and paragraph 89 of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No 78 of 7 February 2017 ‘Regulations regarding the trade and use of natural gas’ (in the wording that was in force until 24 January 2020) with Article 64 and the first and the third sentence of Article 105 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia and with Section 107(7) of the Energy Law
Combined case: 2021-03-03
On the compliance of Section 82(1) of the Criminal Law in the wording which was in force from 1 April 2013 until 10 May 2016 with the first sentence of Article 100 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia, and on the compliance of the transitional provision of the law of 21 April 2016 ‘Amendments to the Criminal Law’ with Article 1 and the second sentence of Article 92 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court resolved:
To terminate legal proceedings in Case No. 2021-34-01 “On Compliance of Section 82, Paragraph One of the Criminal Law in the Wording Effective from 1 April 2013 to 10 May 2016 with the First Sentence of Article 100 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and Compliance of the Transitional Provision of the Law “Amendments to the Criminal Law” of 21 April 2016 with Article 1 and the Second Sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia”.
-
The Constitutional Court terminates proceedings in the case regarding norms that provided for criminal liability for public call to eliminate national independence of the Republic of Latvia
-
A case initiated with regard to the legal regulation which provided for criminal liability for calls to destroy independence of the Republic of Latvia as a state
On compliance of paragraph 8 of Section 4(1) of the Law on the Management of the Spread of COVID-19 Infection, paragraphs 11 and 124 of Section 1 and paragraph 45 of Section 14 of the Education Law, as well as sub-paragraph 27.1.3, paragraph 327(2) and (3) of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No 360 of 9 June 2020 'Epidemiological Safety Measures for the Containment of the Spread of COVID-19 Infection’ with Article 112 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court decided:
1. To dismiss the proceedings in the case in the part concerning compliance of Article 14, Clause 45 of the Education Law with Article 112 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia.
2. To declare Article 1, Clauses 1 1 and 12 4 of the Education Law, insofar as it relates to the organisation of the education process during the spread of Covid-19 infection, as well as Article 4, part one, Clause 8 of the Management Law of the Spread of Covid-19 Infection compliant with Article 112 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia.
3. To declare sub-paragraph 27.1.3 (in the wording effective from 17 September 2020 to 19 August 2021), Clause 32 7, sub-paragraph 2 (in the wording effective from 17 September 2020 to 19 August 2021) and sub-paragraph 3 (in the wording effective from 17 September 2020 to 19 August 2021) of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulations No 360 of 9 June 2020 "Epidemiological Safety Measures for the Containment of the Spread of COVID-19 Infection” compliant with Article 112 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia.
On compliance of paragraph 10 of Section 13(1) of the Law on the Procedures for Holding under Arrest and of paragraph 10 of Annex 4 to the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No 800 of 27 November 2007 ‘Internal procedure regulations of investigation prisons’ with the first sentence of Article 101 and the first sentence of Article 106 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court ruled the following:
To recognise Section 13, Paragraph One, Clause 10 of the Law on the Procedures for Holding under Arrest and Paragraph 10 of Annex 4 to Regulation of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 800 of 27 November 2007 “Internal Rules of Conduct of Investigation Prison” as being compatible with the first sentence of Article 101 and the first sentence of Article 106 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
On compliance of Section 313(1) and (3) of the Electricity Market Law and paragraphs 21.3, 28, 30, 31, 48.4 of and Annex 3 to the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No 560 of 2 September 2020 ‘Regulation on the production of electricity using renewable energy sources, as well as on price determination procedures and control’ with Article 1 and the first sentence of Article 105 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
On compliance of sub-paragraph 88.2 and paragraph 89 of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No 78 of 7 February 2017 ‘Regulations regarding the trade and use of natural gas’ (in the wording that was in force until 24 January 2020) with Article 64 and the first and the third sentence of Article 105 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia and with Section 107(7) of the Energy Law
Combined case: 2021-03-03
On compliance of paragraph 2418 of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No 360 of 9 June 2020 ‘Epidemiological safety measures for the containment of the spread of COVID-19 infection’ (in the wording that was in force from 7 April 2021 until 1 June 2021) with the first sentence of Article 91, the first and the third sentence of Article 105 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2021-24-03
On compliance of sub-paragraph 88.2 and paragraph 89 of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No 78 of 7 February 2017 ‘Regulations regarding the trade and use of natural gas’ (in the wording that was in force until 24 January 2020) with Article 64 and the first and the third sentence of Article 105 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia and with Section 107(7) of the Energy Law
Combined case: 2021-03-03
On the compliance of the first sentence of Paragraph 4 of the Transitional Provisions of the Construction Law with Article 1, the first sentence of Article 91, and the first sentence of Article 106 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court ruled the following:
1. To recognise the first sentence of Paragraph 4 of the Transitional Provisions of the Construction Law as being compatible with Article 1 and the first sentence of Article 106 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
2. To recognise the first sentence of Paragraph 4 of the Transitional Provisions of the Construction Law as being incompatible with the first sentence of Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and null and void as of 1 January 2023.
-
Requirement to obtain a second level higher education in order to retain the right to independent practice is compatible with the Satversme, but extending such a requirement to only some specialists is not
-
A case initiated with regard to the transitional provision of the Construction Law which restricts an individual’s right to continue independent practice in design