Case Regarding Compensations to Owners of Properties Located in Nature Reserves
On 16 August 2013 the 2nd Panel of the Constitutional Court initiated case “On the Compliance of Para 8 of Transitional Provisions of Law on the Conservation of Species and Biotopes with Article 1 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.”
Contested Norm
The contested norm provides that the compensation for significant damages caused by animals of the specially protected non-huntable and migratory species shall not be calculated and disbursed in 2009, 2010 and 2011.
Norm of Higher Legal Force
Article 1 of the Satversme: “Latvia is an independent democratic republic.”
Article 105 of the Satversme: “Everyone has the right to own property. Property shall not be used contrary to the interests of the public. Property rights may be restricted only in accordance with law. Expropriation of property for public purposes shall be allowed only in exceptional cases on the basis of a specific law and in return for fair compensation.“
Facts
The case has been initiated having regard to the application submitted by the Department of Administrative Cases of the Supreme Court Senate. The Department of Administrative Cases was examining a case regarding compensation for significant damages caused by animals of the specially protected non-huntable and migratory species.
In accordance with the law On Specially Protected Nature Territories compensation must be awarded for restrictions to economic activities in protected territories. The owner, who owns immovable property (a fish pond) in the territory of nature reserve “Sātiņu dīķi”, was refused payment of compensation for the damages caused to the fish farm by fish-eating birds in 2009.
The application expresses the opinion that, even though the contested norm was adopted during the period of economic recession with the aim of economising state budget resources, it envisages disproportional restriction to the right to own property and also violates the principle of legal certainty.
Legal Proceedings
The Constitutional Court has asked the Saeima to provide a reply on the facts of the case and legal substantiation by 16 October 2013.
The term for preparing the case is 16 January 2014.
Linked case: 2013-13-01