Search

On Compliance of the Law “On the Republic of Latvia and the Russian Federation Treaty on the State Border of Latvia and Russia” with Article 3 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and the Words “Observing the Principle of Inviolability of Borders Accepted by the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe” of the Article 1 of the Law “On the Republic of Latvia and the Russian Federation Treaty on State Border of Latvia and Russia” with the Preamble and Para 9 of the Declaration of 4 May 1990 of The Supreme Council of the Latvian SSR “On Restoration of Independence of the Republic of Latvia”

Combined case: 2007-10-0102

On Compliance of the Words "on an Ongoing Basis" of the Provision Included in Para 6 of the Cabinet Regulation No. 644 of 8 August 2006, Regulations Regarding the Amount of the Allowance for Child Care and the Supplement to the Allowance for Child Care for Twins or More Children Born During One Delivery, the Review Procedures Thereof, Procedures for the Granting and Payment of the Allowance and Supplement with Articles 91 and 110 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Constitutional Court held that the words “on an ongoing basis” of Para 6 of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No. 644 of August 8, 2006 “Regulations Regarding the Amount of the Allowance for Child Care and the Supplement to the Allowance for Child Care for Twins or More Children Born During One Delivery, the Review Procedures Thereof, Procedures for the Granting and Payment of the Allowance and Supplement” do not comply with Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and are invalid as of March 1, 2006.

On Compliance of the Part of Ādaži Spatial Plan Providing for Construction in the Flooding Area of Lielais Baltezers with Article 115 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Constitutional Court held:
1. The part of the Ādaži Parish Spatial Plan, which provides for construction in the territory of the Big Baltezers Lake with the probability of flooding at least once a hundred years, does not comply with Article 115 of the Satversme and invalid as of March 30, 2006.
2. The words of Item 5 of the binding part 4.30.1 a) (1) of the Ādaži Parish Spatial Plan “except for cases when a detailed plan, by justifying it appropriately and observing the requirements established in the Protection Zone Law, establishes the building setback line closer to the water body” do not comply with the fifth part of Section 6 of the Spatial Planning Law and invalid as of March 30, 2006.

On Compliance of the Part of Riga Spatial Plan 2006 – 2018 Related to the Territory of the Freeport of Riga with Article 115 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Constitutional court:
1. Held that the part of the Riga City Land Use Plan 2006 – 2018 related to the territory of the Freeport of Riga violates Article 115 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and is invalid as from the date of coming into force, i.e. 4 January 2006.
2. Held that the Riga City Development Plan 1995 – 2005 and the respective Riga City building regulations are valid within the boundaries of the Freeport of Riga established by the Regulation No. 690 of 22 August 2006 by the Cabinet of Ministers “Regulations on Delimiting the Boundaries of the Freeport of Riga”.

On Compliance of the Law “On Authorisation to the Cabinet of Ministers to Sign the Draft Agreement between the Republic of Latvia and the Russian Federation on the State Border between Latvia and Russia Initialled on August 7, 1997” and the Words “Observing the Principle of Inviolability of Borders Adopted by the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe” of Article 1 of the Law “On the Republic of Latvia and the Russian Federation Treaty on the State Border of Latvia and Russia” with the Preamble and Para 9 of the Declaration of May 4, 1990 of The Supreme Council of the Latvian SSR “On Restoration of Independence of the Republic of Latvia” and Compliance of the Treaty of March 27, 2007 of the Republic of Latvia and the Russian Federation of the State Border of Latvia and Russia with Article 3 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Constitutional Court held:
1. The Law “On Authorization to the Cabinet of Ministers to Sign the Draft Border Treaty between the Republic of Latvia and the Russian Federation on the State Border of Latvia and Russia Initialled on August 7, 1997” complies with the Preamble and Article 9 of the Declaration of May 4, 1990 by the Supreme Council of the Latvian SSR “On the Renewal of the Independence of the Republic of Latvia”.
2. The Republic of Latvia and the Russian Federation Treaty on the State Border of Latvia and Russia complies with Article 3 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
3. The Law “On the Republic of Latvia and the Russian Federation Treaty on the State Border of Latvia and Russia” complies with Article 3 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
4. The words “observing the principle of inviolability of borders established by the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe” included in Article 1 of the Law “On the Republic of Latvia and the Russian Federation Treaty on the State Border of Latvia and Russia” do not comply with the first part of Article 68 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and invalid from the day of publishing of the judgment.

On Compliance of the Words “Without Restriction on the Term of Office” of Section 7(4) of Constitutional Court Law with Articles 83, 91 and Part 1 of Article 101 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Combined case: 2007-03-01

On Compliance of the Second, the Third and the Fourth Sentence of Para 7 of the Transitional Provisions of Law On Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau with Articles 91 and 106 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Constitutional Court held the second, third and fourth sentence of Para 7 of the Transitional Provision of the Law on Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau complies with Article 91 and Article 106 of the Satversme.

On Compliance of Para 2 Part 1 of Section 3 and Section 9(1) of Citizenship Law with Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

On Compliance of the Regulation No. 32 of January 8, 2007 by the Cabinet of Ministers "Amendments to National Security Law" with Articles 1 and 81 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

On Compliance of Section 68 of Medical Treatment Law with Article 91 and the First Sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia, Part 4 of Article 5 of The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Part 4 of Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

On Compliance of the Words and Figures “(but not Sooner than from the Day a Person has Reached 15 Years of Age, Except the Case Specified in Paragraph 40 of These Regulations)” Included in Para 2 of the Regulation No. 165 of April 23, 2002 by the Cabinet of Ministers "Procedures for Producing Evidence, Calculation and Registration of Periods of Insurance" with Articles 64, 91 and 109 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Constitutional Court held the words and numbers of the Regulation No. 165 of April 23, 2002 by the Cabinet of Ministers “(but not sooner than from the day a person has reached 15 years of age, except the case specified in Paragraph 40 of these Regulations)” do not comply with Article 64 of the Satversme and are invalid from the day of passing the provision.

On Compliance of the Words "Without Restriction on the Term of Office" of Section 7(4) of Constitutional Court Law with Article 83, the First Sentence of Article 91 and Part 1 of Article 101 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Constitutional court held:
1. The words “a person, who pursuant to the Law “On Judicial Power” has been approved to the office of a judge for an unlimited term” included in the fourth part of Section 7 of the Constitutional Court Law comply with the first part of Article 101 of the Satversme.
2. The words “a person, who pursuant to the Law “On Judicial Power” has been approved to the office of a judge for an unlimited term” of the fourth part of Section 7 of the Constitutional Court Law do not comply with Article 83 and the first sentence of Article 91 of the Satversme and invalid from April 1, 2008.
3. The fourth part of Section 7 of the Constitutional Court Law shall be applicable according to Article 83, Article 84 and the first sentence of Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
4. The fourth part of Section 7 of the Constitutional Court Law is applicable to the Applicant Andrejs Lepse according to Article 83, Article 84 and the first sentence of Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.

On Compliance of the Provision “if This Person Is Not Employed on the Day of the Granting of the Benefit (is not Deemed to Be an Employee or Self-Employed Person in Accordance with Law on State Social Insurance)” Included in Part 1 of Section 7.1 of Law On State Social Allowances with Articles 91 and 110 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

On Compliance of the Words “up to 1 January 1996” of Para 2 of Section 13(1) and Para 3 of Section 13(1) of Law On Personal Income Tax with Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Constitutional court held words and figures “up to January 1, 1996” of Item 2 of the first part of Section 13 and Item 3 of the first part of Section 13 of the Law “On Personal Income Tax” comply with Section 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.

On Compliance of the Second Sentence of Section 22(4) of Law on Personal Income Tax with Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Combined case: 2006-28-01

On Compliance of Section 24(3) of Strike Law with Article 108 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Constitutional Court held the third part of Section 24 of the Strike Law complies with Section 108 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.

On Compliance of the Words “Residence Permits are Not Issued” Included in Section 35 of Law on Entry and Residence of Foreign Citizens and Stateless Persons in the Republic of Latvia and the Words “the Issue of a Residence Permit Shall be Refused” Included in Section 34 of Immigration Law with Article 96 and 110 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

On Compliance of the Words “not More than LVL 392” of the Provision Included in Para 2.2 of the Regulation No. 644 of August 8. 2006 by the Cabinet of Ministers "Regulations Regarding the Amount of the Allowance for Child Care and the Supplement to the Allowance for Child Care for Twins or More Children Born During One Delivery, the Review Procedures Thereof, Procedures for the Granting and Payment of the Allowance and Supplement" with Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Combined case: 2006-24-03

On Compliance of the Words “and not More than LVL 392 per Month” of the Provision Included in Para 3.1 of the Regulation No. 1003 of 7 December 2004 by the Cabinet of Ministers " Procedures by Which the Allowance for Child Care and the Supplement to the Allowance for Child Care for Twins or More Children Born During One Delivery Shall be Granted and Disbursed" with Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Combined case: 2006-24-03

On Compliance of the Plan of the Binding Regulation No. 4 of January 25, 2006 by Limbaži City Council on "Graphical Section of the Spatial Plan of Limbaži City and Regulations of Utilization and Construction of the Territory", wherewith the Land Parcel of 24 Cēsu Street is Included in the Territory of Natural Foundation of the Target Group of Territorial Utilization and Real Estate or of Free Construction Territory for Wood Parks and Parks, with Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Constitutional Court held the plan of the regulations No. 4 of January 25, 2006 of “ Graphical Part of the Spatial Plan of Limbaži City and Regulations of Utilization and Construction of the Territory” binding on the Limbaži City Council, wherewith the land parcel at 24 Cēsu Street has been included in the territory of natural foundation of the target group of territorial use and real estate or of free construction territory for wood parks and parks, complies with Section 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.