Published: 15.11.2012.
On Compliance of Section 567(3) of Civil Procedure Law, Insofar it Does not Envisage Covering the Remuneration for the Duties of Office Performed by a Sworn Bailiff From the State Budget Resources, When the Enforcer of the Debt is Exempt From Paying the Costs of Enforcing the Judgement, with Article 107 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and the Compliance of Paragraph 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation of 30 August 2011 No. 670 "Regulation on the Amount of Expenditure Necessary for Performing Enforcement Activities and the Procedure of Payment" with Article 64 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Years
2012
Stages of the proceedings
Adjudicated
Outcome of the proceedings
Judgement
Type of the proceedings
Court sitting with the participation of the participants of the case
Applicant
Person
Applicant: Daina Priedniece, Andželas Klaģe, Ilze Mālmeistere, Aelitas Triba, Gaida Rutkovska, Sandra Rundele, Sandra Paegle, Valija Baltā, Iveta Kruka, Artis Cerbulis, Zane Filatova, Zane Trasūne, Ilona Kalniņa, Pārsla Bērziņa, Ilze Zēberga un Katrīna Baltalksne
Date of the judgment: 27.06.2013.
Official publication: 28.06.2013.

On Compliance of Section 567(3) of Civil Procedure Law, Insofar it Does not Envisage Covering the Remuneration for the Duties of Office Performed by a Sworn Bailiff From the State Budget Resources, When the Enforcer of the Debt is Exempt From Paying the Costs of Enforcing the Judgement, with Article 107 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and the Compliance of Paragraph 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation of 30 August 2011 No. 670 "Regulation on the Amount of Expenditure Necessary for Performing Enforcement Activities and the Procedure of Payment" with Article 64 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Case short name: The Remuneration for the Duties of Office Performed by a Sworn Bailiff from the State Budget

Constitutional Court held:
1) to recognise Section 567 (3) of the Civil Procedure Law as being compatible with Article 107 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia;
2) to recognise Paragraph 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation of 30 August 2011 No. 670 “Regulation on the amount of expenditure necessary for performing enforcement activities and the procedure for paying it” as being incompatible with Article 64 and Article 105 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and invalid as of 1 January 2014.

Judgment_1 (Case No 2012-22-0103)