Statistical data: Number of Decisions: 3

Important decisions

Identification: EST-95-1-001
a) Estonia / b) National Court / c) Constitutional Review Chamber / d) 11.01.1995 / e) III-4/A-12/94 / f) Review of the Rules for the Issue and Extension of Foreigners' Residence and Work Permits / g) Riigi Teataja I 1995, no. 9, Article 112 / h).

Keywords of the systematic thesaurus:
Constitutional justice - Types of litigation tribution of powers between State authorities.
Constitutional justice - Types of litigation - Litigation in respect of the formal validity of enactments.
Institutions - Executive bodies - Powers.

Keywords of the alphabetical index: Delegation / Legislation, delegated / Review, scope.

 Headnotes:
The Governments' power to delegate to a minister the enactment of orders of a legislative character must be provided by statute.
The question of the constitutionality of the substance of a statute or other legal act does not arise when it appears that the constitutional procedure for its enact-ment was violated.
The National Court's scope of review is limited to the extent of the referral even though it appears that the  whole norm, and not just the single provision for which review was requested, is unconstitutional on procedural grounds.

Summary:
The lower court ruled unconstitutional and rendered inapplicable § 40 of the Rules for the Issue and Extension of Foreigners' Residence and Work Permits approved by order of the Minister of Internal Affairs. § 40 of the Rules provided that foreigners whose domicile under the laws of the former USSR has been registered as their employer's personnel department or some other non-residential place in Estonia would be considered on the same basis as applicants from outside Estonia, unless they had a permanent residence in Estonia before the aforementioned registration. The court held that this rule was in viola-tion of Article 10 of the Constitution, which provides for the principle of the rule of law as a basis for the legal system of Estonia. Observance of the principle of the rule of law requires that people's confidence in the law and in the legality of government authorities be ensured and guaranteed.
Under the law, the constitutional review process in the National Court is initiated when a lower court holds that a statute or other legal norm is unconstitutional.
The National Court did not agree with the reasoning of the first instance court, but found nevertheless that the Rules had been approved without following the con-stitutionally established procedure. According to the Constitution, orders of a Minister will be issued on a statutory basis. The order of the Minister of Internal Affairs stated that the Rules were approved on the basis of § 1 of the Rules for the Issue of Foreigners' Residence and Working Permissions, approved by order of the Government. The power of the Govern-ment to give such order follows from the Foreigners Act. The Foreigners' Act, however, does not authorise the Government to delegate to a Minister the enact-ment of the rules which the Minister of Internal Affairs established. § 2 of the Foreigners' Act confers upon the Government an authority to determine what government agencies will execute the Foreigners' Act in specific but not in general cases.
The National Court also noted that the lower court had first to determine the formal constitutionality of the Rules. The need to review the constitutionality of the substance of a statute or other legal act arises only after it has been determined that the constitutional procedure of enactment was followed. Once it had become apparent that formal or procedural require-ments had not been met, there would have been no need to examine the substantive constitutionality of the Rules. Since the National Court's scope of review is limited to the extent of the referral, the Court declared only § 40 of the Rules null and void.

Languages: Estonian.

Identification: EST-95-1-002
a) Estonia / b) National Court / c) Constitutional Review Chamber / d) 12.04.1995 / e) III-4/A-1/95 / f) Review of the Privatisation of Dwelling-Houses Act/ g) Riigi Teataja I 1995, no. 42, Article 655 / h).

Keywords of the systematic thesaurus:
General principles - Reasonableness.
Fundamental rights - Civil and political rights - Right to property - Expropriation.
Fundamental rights - Civil and political rights - Right to property - Privatisation.

Keywords of the alphabetical index:
Compensation, fair / Forced alienation / Property rights, equal protection / Property rights, inviolability / Public purpose.

Headnotes:
Property rights are inviolable and enjoy equal protection. Forced alienation may take place only for public purposes in return for fair and prompt compensation.

Summary:
The first instance court ruled unconstitutional and rendered inapplicable the Privatisation of Dwelling-Houses Act to the extent that it imposed on co-opera-tive societies a duty to alienate their dwellings.
Under the law, the constitutional review process in the National Court is initiated when a lower court holds that a statute or other legal norm is unconstitutional.
The National Court found that the Privatisation of Dwelling-Houses Act provides for the forced alienation of dwellings owned by co-operatives without payment to them by the State. Under the Constitution, property rights are inviolable and enjoy equal protection. Forced alienation may take place only for public purposes in return for fair and prompt compensation. Transfer of property from one private person to another is not an alienation for public purposes. As the Act provides for a purchase price that is lower than the market price, it does not meet the constitutional requirement of fair compensation.

Languages: Estonian.