Search
Filter results
- Years
- 36
- 33
- 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
- 4
- 6
- 8
- 3
- 569
- 384
- 3
- More
- Outcome of the proceedings
- 443
- 125
- 210
- More
- Type of the proceedings
- 481
- 106
- 178
- 212
- More
On Compliance of Section 11.6 (1) of Judicial Disciplinary Liability Law with Article 100 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: The Disciplinary Cases of JudgesThe Constitutional Court held:
to recognise Section 116 (1) of the Judicial Disciplinary Liability Law as being compatible with the first sentence of Article 100 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
On Compliance of Para 100 of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No. 262 of 16 March 2010 "Regulations Regarding the Production of Electricity Using Renewable Energy Sources and the Procedures for the Determination of the Price" with Article 64 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: The Suspension of the Mandatory Electricity ProcurementThe Constitutional Court recognised the contested norm as being compatible with Article 64 of the Satversme.
On Compliance of Section 2 of the Law of 25 September 2014 "Amendments to Insolvency Law" and the Law of 30 October 2014 "Amendments to Law on Prevention of Conflict of Interest in Activities of Public Officials" with Article 1 and the First Sentence of Article 106 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: The Insolvency Administrators as Officials and also - AdvocatesThe Constitutional Court held :
to recognise Section 2 of the law of 25 September 2014 “Amendments to the Insolvency Law” and the law of 30 October 2014 “Amendments to the Law on Prevention of Conflict of Interest in the Activities of Public Officials”, to the extent they do not ensure to administrators of insolvency proceedings, who are simultaneously also advocates, guarantees for professional activities for retaining the chosen employment, as being incompatible with the first sentence of Article 106 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
On Compliance of Section 2 of the Law "Amendments to the Insolvency Law" of 25 September 2014 and the Law "Amendments to the Law On Prevention of Conflict of Interest in Activities of Public Officials" of 30 October 2014 with Article 1 and the First Sentence of Article 106 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: Insolvency Administrators as Public Officials and, Simultaneously, tax Consultants, Members of a Company's BoardOn 22 February 2016 the Constitutional Court adopted a decision to terminate legal proceedings in Case No. 2015-04-01 “On Compliance of Section 2 of the Law “Amendments to the Insolvency Law” of 25 September 2014 and the Law “Amendments to the Law On Prevention of Conflict of Interest in the Activities of Public Officials” of 30 October 2014 with Article 1 and the first sentence of Article 106 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.”
-
The Constitutional Court terminates legal proceedings in case regarding establishing the status of state officials for administrators of insolvency proceedings, who simultaneously are also tax (financial) advisors or are board members at capital companies
-
A case initiated with regard to the establishment of the status of a public official for the administrators of insolvency proceedings
On Compliance of Section 8(1) of Law on Control of Aid for Commercial Activity with Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2014-36-01
On Compliance of the First and the Second Part of Section 7 of Law on the National Flag of Latvia and Section 201.43 of Latvian Administrative Violations Code with Article 100 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: The FlagsConstitutional Court held:
1. To recognise the first and the second part of Section 7 of Law on the National Flag of Latvia as being compatible with Article 100 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
2. To recognise Section 20143 of the Latvian Administrative Violations Code, insofar it established penalty for failure to place the Latvian national flag on residential buildings owned by private persons in accordance with the first and the second part of Section 7 of Law on the National Flag of Latvia, as being incompatible with Article 100 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
-
The obligation to place the national flag of Latvia on the residential buildings owned by natural persons complies with the Satversme, punishment for not fulfilling this obligation is incompatible with the Satversme
-
A case initiated with regard to the obligation to raise the flag on days of festivities and mourning
On Compliance of Section 8(1) of Law on Control of Aid for Commercial Activity with Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: The Interest on DepositThe Constitutional Court recognised the contested norm as being compatible with Article 105 of the Satversme.
-
A norm on ceasing disbursement of interest payment from a commercial company, which experiences financial difficulties and is receiving state aid, complies with the Satversme
-
A case has been initiated with regard to interest payments from a commercial company, which experiences financial difficulties and is receiving aid
On Compliance of Para 54.1 of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation of 10 March 2009 No. 221 "Regulations Regarding Electricity Production and Price Determination upon Production of Electricity in Cogeneration" with Article 1 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and Section 28(1) of Electricity Market Law
Case short name: The Price of Natural Gas in Mandatory ProcurementOn Compliance of Para 1 of Section 36(2), Section 42 and Words in Section 177(3) "with or without confiscation of property" of the Criminal Law with the Second and Third Sentence of Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: The Confiscation of PropertyThe Constitutional Court recognised the contested norms as being compatible with Article 105 of the Satversme.
On Compliance of Section 279(1) of and Section 288(1) of Latvian Administrative Violations Code with Article 92 of the Satversme
Case short name: Appeal in Cases of Administrative ViolationsOn 11 March 2015 the Constitutional Court adopted a decision on terminating legal proceedings in case No. 2014-33-01 “On Compliance of Section 279(1) and Section 288(1) of Latvian Administrative Violations Code with Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.”
-
Legal proceedings terminated in the case regarding the rights of perons, whose property has been seized, to appeal against a decision in an administrative violation case in the part regarding his or her property
-
A case has been initiated regarding a person’s right to appeal against a decision on seizing property adopted in an administrative violation case, if the person is neither a person, who has been held administratively liable, nor the victim
On Compliance of Section 495(1) of Civil Procedure Law with the First Sentence in Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: The Arbitration CourtsOn Compliance of Para 1 of Section 44 (1) of Civil Procedure Law (in the Wording of 29 November 2012) with Article 1, Article 91, Article 92 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: The Litigation Expenses-
The Norm, which Defines the Amounts in which the Costs for the Assistance of an Advocate Related to Conducting a Matter are Reimbursed for, is Compatible with the Satversme
-
Case Initiated with Regard to a Norm, which Defines the Amounts in which the Costs for the Assistance of an Advocate Related to Conducting a Matter are Reimbursed for
On Compliance of Subparagraph "f" of Para 1 of Section 3(1), Section 19.1 of Natural Resources Tax Law, the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation of 14 January 2014 No. 27 "Amendments to the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation of 19 June 2007 No.404 "Procedures for the Calculation and Payment of Natural Resources Tax and Procedures for the Issuance of Permits for Use of Natural Resources"" with Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: The Natural Resources Tax for Small Hydroelectric Power StationsCombined case: 2014-11-0103
On Compliance of Para 1 of Section 3, Para 1 of Section 4, and Section 5 of Subsidized Electricity Tax Law with Article 1 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2014-12-01
On Compliance of Para 1 of Section 3, Para 1 of Section 4, and Section 5 of Subsidized Electricity Tax Law with Article 1 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2014-12-01
On Compliance of Para 1 of Section 3, Para 1 of Section 4, and Section 5 of Subsidized Electricity Tax Law with Article 1 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2014-12-01
On Compliance of Section 635(6) of Civil Procedure Law, insofar it Applies to the Reversal of Execution of a Judgement in Matters Regarding Recovery of Remuneration for Work, with the first and the third sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2014-13-01
On Compliance of Para 1 and 2 of Section 3 and Section 5 of Subsidized Electricity Tax Law with Article 1 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2014-12-01
On Compliance of Para 1 of Section 3 and Para 1 of Section 4 of Subsidized Electricity Tax Law with Article 1 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Combined case: 2014-12-01
On Compliance of Section 363.8 (8) of Civil Procedure Law (in the Wording that was effective until 31 October 2010), insofar it Applies to the Right of the Insolvency Administrator to Appeal against a Court’s Decision, by which the Administrator is Dismissed from the Insolvency Proceedings, with Article 92 of the Satversme
Case short name: The Appeal of the Dismissal of an Insolvency Administrator-
The norm pertaining to the right of insolvency administrator to appeal against a court’s decision, by which the administrator is dismissed from the insolvency proceedings, complies with the Satversme
-
A Case Initiated regarding a Norm, which Applies to the Right of Insolvency Administrator to Appeal against a Court’s Decisions, by which the Administrator is Dismissed from the Insolvency Proceedings