A judgment in the case on restrictions on compulsory rent charge has been adopted
The Constitutional Court has adopted a judgment in the case No. 2010-22-01 “On Compliance of Para 7 of Transitional Provisions of the Law “On Land Reform in the Cities of the Republic of Latvia” insofar as it Applies to Land under Residential Apartment Houses and Para 40 of Transitional Provisions of the Law “On Privatisation of State and Local Government Residential Houses” with Article 1 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia”.
The contested norm provides that rent charge for a land parcel in case of compulsorily lease in 2009 and 2010 cannot exceed the calculated amount of rent charge of the previous year by more than 25 percent. The applicant Sonia Traub owns land property, on which a privatised residential apartment house is located. The applicant indicates that the contested norms infringe, among the rest, her right to property.
The Constitutional Court indicated that on 15 April 2009 it has adopted a judgment in the case wherein, among the rest, norms of similar content were contested; notably, rent charge for land in 2008, 2009 and 2010 cannot exceed the calculated amount of rent charge of the previous year by more than 25 percent. The Court recognized these norms as non-compliant with Article 105 of the Satversme and declared them null and void as from 1 November 2009.
The Court recognized that the contested norms of the present case, though formally amended in October 2009, preserve, in fact, the previous situation. Consequently, the Constitutional Court recognized the contested norms as non-compliant with Article 105 of the Satversme. However, the Court recognized that cancelling of the Contested Norms as from the date of adopting them would non-proportionally encumber owners of apartments because the possible rent charge for the end of 2009 and for 2010 would increase several times. The Court takes into account the fact that the Contested Norms were effective for a relatively short period of time, i.e. for one year and two months, and they have already lost their force (from 1 January 2011). Consequently, the Court established that the Contested Norms cannot be declared null and void as from the date of adopting them.
The Judgment of the Constitutional Court is final and not subject to appeal.
Linked case: 2010-22-01