On Compliance of Para 3 of Section 16 of the Advocacy Law of the Republic of Latvia with the First Sentence of Article 106 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
On Compliance of the First and the Second Part of Section 38 of the Law “On the Date of Entering into Force and the Procedure of Application of Introduction and Parts of Inheritance Law and Property Law of the Restored Civil Law of the Republic of Latvia of 1937” with Article 1, the First Sentence of Article 91, as well as the First and the Third Sentence of Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2022-02-01
On Compliance of Section 4, Paragraph Three, Clause 1, Section 4, Paragraph Nine, Section 7, Paragraph 11 of the Law on Ports, as well as Paragraph 16, Sub-paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Transitional Provisions with Article 1 and the first sentence of Article 101, Paragraph Two of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
On the Decision of the Minister of Environmental Protection and Regional Development of 16 December 2021 No. 1 2/168 "On the Binding Regulation of the Jūrmala City Council of 30 September 2021 No. 38 "Amendments to the Jūrmala City Council Regulation of 12 September 2017 No. 1 2/168" suspension of the Operation of the Binding Regulation No. 1 "On Entry of Vehicles into the Special Regime Zone in the Administrative Territory of the City of Jūrmala"" with Article 115 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia and the Section 10, Paragraph three and Section 12, Paragraph one, Clause 6 of the Law "On Taxes and Fees"
On Compliance of the Third Part of Section 631 of the Criminal Procedure Law with the First Sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2021-44-01
On compliance of Section 627, Paragraph four and five of the Criminal Procedure Law with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2022-01-01
Regarding Compliance of the Order No. 1-2/11040 of 21 December 2021 of the Minister for Environmental Protection and Regional Development "Regarding Suspension of the Effect of Binding Regulations No. 22/2021 of the Ķekava Municipality Council dated 8 September 2021 “Regarding the Operation of Gambling at Ķekava Municipality” with Section 41, Paragraph Two, Clause 11, and Section 42, Paragraph Ten of the Law on Gambling and Lotteries, as well as with Section 49, Paragraph One of the Law On Local Governments
The Constitutional Court ruled as follows:
To recognise the Order No. 1-2/11040 of 21 December 2021 of the Minister for Environmental Protection and Regional Development "Regarding Suspension of the Effect of the Binding Regulation No. 22/2021 of the Ķekava Municipality Council dated 8 September 2021 “Regarding the Operation of Gambling at Ķekava Municipality” as being compatible with Section 41, Paragraph Two, Clause 11, and Section 42, Paragraph Ten of the Law on Gambling and Lotteries, as well as with Section 49, Paragraph One of the Law On Local Governments”.
On Compliance of the Third Part of Section 631 of the Criminal Procedure Law with the First Sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2021-44-01
On compliance of Article 38 paragraph 1 and the first and second phrase of paragraph 2 of the Law “on the entry into force and implementation arrangements for the introductory part of the re-established Civil Code of the Republic of Latvia of 1937 and the parts governing inheritance law and rights in rem” with the Articles 1 and 91, and the first and third phrase of Article 105 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2022-02-01
On Compliance of Para 1 of Section 23 of the Punishment Register Law, insofar it applies to information about an acquitted person, with Article 96 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court decided:
1. To declare Section 23(1) of the Punishment Register Law, insofar as it relates to information on acquitted persons, as incompatible with Section 96 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia and null and void as of 1 July 2023.
2. In relation to acquitted persons who have started protection of their fundamental rights through general legal remedies, to declare Section 23(1) of the Punishment Register Law, insofar as it relates to information about the acquitted person, as incompatible with Section 96 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia and null and void from the moment when the infringement of the fundamental rights of the person occurred.
On Compliance of Section 169 (6) of the Insolvency Law with Article 107 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court resolved as follows:
To declare Section 169, Paragraph Six of the Insolvency Law, insofar as it relates to the provisions of Section 22, Paragraph Two, Clauses 1 and 2, as well as Section 20, Paragraph One, Clause 7, of the Insolvency Law to be compliant with Article 107 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
On Compliance of the Second Sentence of the Third Part of Section 631 of the Criminal Procedure Law with the First Sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2021-44-01
On compliance of the number and word “10 years”, included in Para 531 of the Cabinet Regulation of 10 March 2009 No. 221 “Regulation on Producing Electricity and Setting Prices in Producing Electrocity in Cogeneration”, and the number and word “10 years”, included in Para 68, of the Cabinet Regulation of 2 September 2020 No. 561 “Regulation on Producing Electricity, Supervision and Setting Prices in Producing Electrocity in Cogeneration”, with Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court ruled the following:
to recognize Clause 53.1 and the number and word “10 years” of Cabinet Regulation No. 221 (adopted on 10 March 2009) “Regulations Regarding Electricity Production and Price Determination upon Production of Electricity in Cogeneration” and Clause 68 and the number and word “10 years” of Cabinet Regulation No. 561 (adopted 2 September 2020) “Regulations Regarding the Generation, Supervision, and Pricing of Electricity in Generation of Electricity in Cogeneration” as complying with Section 105 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia.
On Complianceof Section 43 (4) of the Civil Procedure Law with the First Sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court held:
1. To recognise Section 43 (4) of the Civil Procedure Law, insofar it does not envisage the right of a legal person governed by private law to request the court to decide on exempting it from the obligation to pay the State fee for submitting the statement of claim, as being incompatible with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and void as of 1 October 2023.
2. With respect to merchant IMEX PROVIDER LTD, registered in the British Virgin Islands, to recognise Section 43 (4) of the Civil Procedure Law, insofar it does not envisage the right of a legal person governed by private law to request the court to decide on exempting it from the obligation to pay the State fee for submitting the statement of claim, as being incompatible with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and void as of the moment when the infringement on its fundamental rights occurred.
On compliance of the first and the second part of Section 38 of the law “On the Date of Coming into Force and Application of the Introduction, the Chapter on Inheritance Law and the Chapter of Property Law of the Restored Civil Law of the Republic of Latvia of 1937” with Article 1 and Article 91, as well as the first and the third sentence of Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and compliance of Section 42 (3) of the law “On the Date of Coming into Force and Application of the Introduction, the Chapter on Inheritance Law and the Chapter of Property Law of the Restored Civil Law of the Republic of Latvia of 1937” with Article 1 and the first sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2022-02-01
On Complinace of Section 534, 5341, 535, 536 and 537 with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court ruled the following:
to declare Sections 534, 534.1, 535, 536 and 537 of the Civil Procedure Law, insofar as they do not provide for supervision of arbitration proceedings in cases where the interested party does not apply to a court of general jurisdiction for enforcement of an Arbitration Court judgment for a long time, when such judgement was to be recognised and enforced abroad, or when it was not necessary to apply to a court of general jurisdiction for the issue of a writ of execution to enforce such judgment, to be incompatible with Article 92 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia as of 1 March 2024.
On compliance of the first and the second part of Section 38, as well as of Section 42 (1) of the law “On the Date of Coming into Force and Application of the Introduction, the Chapter on Inheritance Law and the Chapter of Property Law of the Restored Civil Law of the Republic of Latvia of 1937” with Article 1 and Article 91, as well as the first and the third sentence of Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
On Compliance of the Third Part of Section 631 of the Criminal Procedure Law with the First Sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2021-44-01
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