A judgment in the case on the reduction of the amount of State guaranteed child support has been adopted
The Constitutional Court has adopted a judgment in the case No. 2010-18-01 “On Compliance of Para 4 of the Transitional Provisions of the Maintenance Guarantee Fund Law with Article 1, Article 109 and Article 110 of the Satversme (Constitution) of the Republic of Latvia”.
The Contested Norm envisages reduction of the amount of State guaranteed child support, namely, from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2012, the amount of child support disbursed by the Maintenance Guarantee Fund (hereinafter – the Guarantee Fund) shall not exceed 30 lats per children aged up to 7, and 35 lats for children aged from 7 to 18.
The applicants Marika Skulte and Renāte Dorondo indicated that the contested norm infringes their right to social security (Article 109 of the Satversme) and breaches Article 110 of the Satversme that provides, among the rest, that the State shall provide special support to children and parents. Moreover, the Contested Norm infringes the principle of legitimate expectations and that of proportionality.
The Constitutional Court indicated that ensuring of provisions for a child is the duty of parents. The Court recognized that the applicants could count on receiving of child support from the Guarantee Fund. The Court also indicated that, after coming into force of the Contested Norm, children would receive provisions from the Guarantee Fund if one of their parents fails to fulfil the duty to ensure provisions for a child or fulfils it at the amount that is less than the stipulated minimum amount. Consequently, the applicants could count on the fact that their children would have the right to receive provisions from the Guarantee Fund; however, they were never given the legitimate trust in receipt of the support at a particular amount.
Resources of the Guarantee Fund are accumulated from the resources of the State basic budget; therefore the legislator enjoys a broad freedom of action not only when regulating the procedure for disbursement but also when establishing the amount of support to be disbursed from the Guarantee Fund. The Court also took into consideration the fact that the amount of child support to be paid by the State was influenced by several factors, including economic recession in the State and increasing number of children who have the right to receive child support from the Guarantee Fund. Consequently, the Court recognized that a reasonable reduction of child support ensures disbursement of child support, in 2010, 2011 and 2012, for all children having the right to receive child support.
The judgment of the Constitutional Court is final and not subject to appeal.
Linked case: 2010-18-01