In June 2026, the Constitutional Court delivered judgments in two cases:
By a judgment of 9 June 2026 in case No. 2025-35-03, the procedures for distributing differences in water consumption in the absence of meter verification were found to be incompatible with the first three sentences of Article 105 of the Constitution. The case was initiated following applications submitted by the Riga City Court. Civil cases are pending before the Court concerning the recovery of debts arising, amongst other things, from payments for differences in water consumption. The applicant considered that the obligation requiring a flat owner whose water meters had not been verified to cover the entire difference in water consumption for the residential building constituted a disproportionate restriction of that person’s right to property. The Constitutional Court held that it was not permissible for failure to arrange for verification of the water meter installed in a person’s flat to result in avoidance of payment for the water consumed. However, differences in water consumption may arise due to various circumstances (for example, maintenance work, emergencies, or the technical condition of the water supply system). It is disproportionate to impose sole responsibility for covering the difference in water consumption on a person whose water consumption meters have not been verified within the prescribed period, regardless of the reasons for that difference.
By a judgment of 17 June 2026 in case No. 2025-14-01, the temporary reduction of the second-tier pension contribution rate by one percentage point was recognised as being compatible with Articles 1 and 109 of the Constitution. The case was initiated on the basis of an application submitted by twenty-one members of the 14th Saeima. Members of the Saeima expressed concern that redirecting contributions between the first and second tiers failed to secure the long-term sustainability of the pension system. The Constitutional Court held that the contested provision had been adopted with the aim of achieving socially significant objectives, in particular, compensating for the reduction in state budget revenues arising from changes in labour taxes. A large proportion of Latvia’s population, including employed persons and pensioners, benefit from the changes in labour taxes. A one-percentage-point redistribution of contributions from the second-tier pension system over four years will allow for the creation of additional reserves in the special state pension budget, from which the pensions of current old-age pension recipients are funded. At the same time, the Court verified that the structure of the pension system, the procedures for calculating old-age pensions, the right to receive a pension, and the possibility of accumulating capital in the first and second pension tiers were not being altered. It was not found that the contested provision would have a significant impact on future pension levels. Consequently, it was concluded that the contested provision complied with both the principles of a socially responsible state and legitimate expectations, as well as the right to social security.
On 10 June 2026, the Constitutional Court decided to suspend proceedings in case No. 2025-27-0106 concerning the solidarity contribution reduction and to refer the matter to the Court of Justice of the European Union. In accordance with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, where the outcome of a case depends on the content of provisions of European Union law and the Constitutional Court has doubts as to the interpretation of such provisions, the Constitutional Court must refer the matter to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling. When assessing the contested provisions of the Solidarity Contribution Law, the Constitutional Court had doubts as to whether the solidarity contribution reduction qualifies as State aid under Article 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Eight cases were in preparation at the Constitutional Court, and two cases were prepared for review. In addition to three cases, the type of proceedings and the date of hearing of which had been determined before, the Constitutional Court determined this for five additional cases.
In June, 21 applications were submitted to the Constitutional Court. One application was submitted by the Council of the State Audit Office and 20 applications – by private persons.
In June, the Constitutional Court initiated case No. 2026-09-01 concerning the application of a reduced rate of value added tax to the distribution of books and periodicals in certain languages, following an application by a private person.
In addition, 19 decisions to refuse initiation of a case were adopted with respect to the following applications:
Application No. 56/2026 concerning the provision of the Citizenship Law which grants exiles of Latvia and their descendants the right to register as citizens of Latvia. Decision on the application.
Application No. 79/2026 concerning the provisions of the Law on the Election of the Saeima and the Law on the Election of Local Government Councils, in so far as they do not provide for the right of voters to verify their vote anonymously and do not ensure a publicly auditable manual verification mechanism for automated counting of votes. Decision on the application.
Application No. 81/2026 concerning the provisions of the Civil Procedure Law governing appeals against the actions of bailiffs. Decision on the application.
Application No. 82/2026 concerning the provision of the Criminal Law which provides for criminal liability for the unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition, and the provisions of the Law on the Advocacy Law of the Republic of Latvia pursuant to which a person convicted of an intentional criminal offence may not become a sworn advocate. Decision on the application.
Application No. 84/2026 concerning the provision of the Administrative Procedure Law which sets out the procedures for the submission of an ancillary complaint where a judge has refused to examine an application, and the provision of the Law on Submissions concerning the procedures for appealing against an administrative act or actual actions by an authority. Decision on the application.
Application No. 85/2026 concerning the provisions of the Law on the Management of the Spread of COVID-19 Infection and Cabinet Regulation No. 272 of 3 May 2022, Regulations Regarding Compensation for Serious or Moderately Serious Harm to the Health or Life of a Patient Inflicted due to Adverse Effects Caused by Vaccination against COVID-19 Infection, which provide for the award of compensation only in respect of confirmed adverse effects. Decision on the application.
Application No. 87/2026 concerning the provisions of the Law on Termination of Forced Shared Property in Privatised Apartment Residential Houses and Cabinet Regulation No. 888 of 17 December 2024, Cadastral Value Base for the Calculation of the Universal Cadastral Value, regarding the calculation of the alienation price of land. Decision on the application.
Application No. 88/2026 concerning the provision of the Criminal Procedure Law governing judicial proceedings regarding criminally acquired property. Decision on the application.
Application No. 89/2026 concerning the provision of the Civil Law governing the right to contest the filiation of a child. Decision on the application.
Application No. 90/2026 concerning the provisions of Cabinet Regulation No. 97 of 20 February 2018, Regulations Regarding Lease of the Property of a Public Entity, pursuant to which prison premises may not be leased to merchants posing a threat to public order, or existing lease agreements with such merchants must be terminated. Decision on the application.
Application No. 91/2026 concerning the provision of the Law on Administrative Liability specifying the cases in which judges of regional courts decide on refusal to initiate appeal proceedings and prescribing the form of such decision. Decision on the application.
Application No. 92/2026 concerning the provision of the Criminal Law which provided for criminal liability for tax evasion. Decision on the application.
Application No. 93/2026 concerning the term ‘work’ in the Copyright Law and the concept of work protected by copyright in the field of construction. Decision on the application.
Application No. 94/2026 on the provision of the Civil Law determining the form and validity of an assignment agreement. Decision on the application.
Applications Nos. 95/2026, 96/2026, and 97/2026 concerning the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law, in so far as they do not provide for review of a court ruling de novo on the grounds of a substantial violation of specific provisions of substantive law or procedural law in proceedings regarding criminally acquired property. Decision on application No. 95/2026. Decision on application No. 96/2026. Decision on application No. 97/2026.
Application No. 98/2026 concerning the legal framework, in so far as it fails to ensure effective control over the inaction of a sworn bailiff. Decision on the application.
Application No. 99/2026 on the provision of the Criminal Procedure Law governing the procedures for deciding on matters related to the execution of a punishment. Decision on the application.