Search
Filter results
- Years
- 1
- More
- Stages of the proceedings
- 1
- More
- Outcome of the proceedings
- 1
- More
- Type of the proceedings
- 1
- More
On the compliance of the first sentence of Paragraph 4 of the Transitional Provisions of the Construction Law with Article 1, the first sentence of Article 91, and the first sentence of Article 106 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia
The Constitutional Court ruled the following:
1. To recognise the first sentence of Paragraph 4 of the Transitional Provisions of the Construction Law as being compatible with Article 1 and the first sentence of Article 106 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
2. To recognise the first sentence of Paragraph 4 of the Transitional Provisions of the Construction Law as being incompatible with the first sentence of Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and null and void as of 1 January 2023.
-
Requirement to obtain a second level higher education in order to retain the right to independent practice is compatible with the Satversme, but extending such a requirement to only some specialists is not
-
A case initiated with regard to the transitional provision of the Construction Law which restricts an individual’s right to continue independent practice in design