Search

On Compliance of Para 2 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law “On Compensation for Damages Caused in Criminal Proceedings and Record-Keeping of Administrative Violations” with Article 1 and the Third Sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

The Constitutional Court has ruled:

1. To recognise para 2 of the Transitional Provisions of the law “On compensation for damages caused in criminal proceedings and record-keeping of administrative violations”, insofar as it determines the right to claim compensation for non-pecuniary damages, as being incompatible with Article 1 and the third sentence of Article 92 of the Republic of Latvia and void from the moment it entered into force in respect of the individuals for whom the legal grounds for compensation for non-pecuniary damages arose not earlier than six months before the said law came into effect, who have turned to a decision-making authority and have been denied compensation for non-pecuniary damages because the limitation period has elapsed.
2. In respect of the individuals for whom the legal grounds for compensation for non-pecuniary damages arose not earlier than six months before the law “On compensation for damages caused in criminal proceedings and record-keeping of administrative violations” entered into force, who turned to a decision-making authority and were denied compensation for non-pecuniary damages because the limitation period had elapsed, para 2 of the Transitional Provisions of the law “On compensation for damages caused in criminal proceedings and record-keeping of administrative violations”, insofar as it determines the right to claim compensation for non-pecuniary damages, is to be applied providing that those individuals had the right to claim compensation for non-pecuniary damages within six months after the said law came into force.