06.11.2014.

The provisions in the Binding Regulation of Riga City Council, which define the owners obligation to take care of the territory adjacent to his or her property, insofar the legal regulation does not envisage the municipality’s participation in the fulfilment of these duties, are incompatible with the Satversme

On 6 November 2014 the Constitutional Court passed the judgement in Case No. 2013-20-03 “On the Compliance of Para 4.3 and Para 4.4 of the Binding Regulations of 8 July 2008 of the Riga City Council No. 125 “On Taking Care of Riga City Territory and Maintenance of Buildings” with Article 105 of the Satversme […]

21.10.2014.

Case initiated regarding confiscation of property as a form of punishment envisaged in the Criminal Law

On 20 October 2014 the Constitutional Court at the assignment sitting initiated case “On 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.” […]

06.10.2014.

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 3 October 2014 the 1st Panel of the Constitutional Court initiated the case “On Compliance of Section 279(1) of and Section 288(1) of Latvian Administrative Violations Code with Article 92 of the Satversme.” Contested Norms Section 279(1) of Latvian Administrative Violations Code provides: “A person, who has been held administratively liable, as well as […]

23.07.2014.

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 22 July 2014 the 2nd Panel of the Constitutional Court initiated a case “On Compliance of Para1 of Section 44 (1) of the 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. The Contested Norm […]

09.07.2014.

The Norm on the Binding Force of the Rental Contract for the Successive Owner of the Apartment Compatible with the Satversme

On 7 July 2014 the Constitutional Court passed a judgement in Case No. 2013-17-01 “On Compliance of the First Sentence of Section 8 of Law “On Residential Tenancy” with Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.” The norm, which envisages the binding force of a rental contract for the successive owner of the […]

09.07.2014.

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 […]

11.06.2014.

The provision providing that a decision by the Latvian Prison Administration is not subject to appeal complies with the Satversme

On 10 June 2014 the Constitutional Court passed the judgement in Case No. 2013-18-01 “On the Compliance of the Sixth Sentence of Section 563 (3) of The Sentence Execution Code of Latvia with the First Sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia”. The decision by the Latvian Prison Administration regarding employment of […]

21.05.2014.

A Case Initiated having regard to a Norm in Protection Zone Law

On 21 May 2014 the 2nd Panel of the Constitutional Court initiated case “On Compliance of Para 1 of Section 36(2) of the Protection Zone Law with Article 91 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia”. The Contested Norm Pursuant to Para 1 of Section 36(2) of Protection Zone Law in […]

15.05.2014.

A Case Initiated regarding the Reversal of Execution of a Judgement in Matters regarding Recovery of Remuneration for Work

On 14 May 2014 the 1st Panel of the Constitutional Court initiated case “On Compliance of Section 635(6) of the 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 sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic […]

12.05.2014.

Cases Initiated regarding the Regulation on Applying the Subsidized Energy Tax

On 16 May 2014 two more cases regarding the constitutionality of the provisions of the Law on Subsidized Energy Tax have been initiated by the Constitutional Court. Having regard to an application by Ltd. “Arsenal Energy”, Ltd. “EcoZeta”, Ltd. “ENERCOM PLUS”, Ltd. “Ošmaļi Energy””, Ltd. “Piejūra Energy”, Ltd. “Winergy”, Ltd. “Zemgales enerģijas parks” and Ltd. […]

News