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
On 7 July 2014 the 2nd Panel of the Constitutional Court initiated Case “On Compliance of Section 3638 (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”.
The Contested Norm
The contested norm was effective until 31 October 2010 and it provided, inter alia, that the court’s decision on examination of an application and a complaint, inter alia, on the dismissal of the administrator from performing the duties in the insolvency proceedings on the basis of an application, was not subject to appeal.
The Norm of Higher Legal Force
Article 92 of the Satversme: “Everyone has the right to defend his or her rights and lawful interests in a fair court. Everyone shall be presumed innocent until his or her guilt has been established in accordance with law. Everyone, where his or her rights are violated without basis, has a right to commensurate compensation. Everyone has a right to the assistance of counsel.”
The Facts of the Case
The case has been initiated having regard to Gatis Krasovskis’ constitutional complaint, expressing the opinion that the contested norm places disproportional restrictions upon his fundamental rights; moreover, the restriction allegedly has no legitimate aim. A court has adopted a decision with regard to the applicant on his dismissal from the performance of the duties of administrator in insolvency proceedings. Pursuant to the contested norm this decision is not subject to appeal. This situation is alleged to be in conflict with the right to a fair court.
Legal Proceedings
The Constitutional Court has asked the Saeima and to provide a reply on the facts of the case and legal substantiation by 5 September of the current year.
The term for preparing the case is 7 December 2014. The Court shall decide upon the procedure and the date for hearing the case after the case has been prepared.
Linked case: 2014-23-01