Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 9 July 2012 № 17-П on the review of constitutionality of the Protocol of Accession of the Russian Federation to Marrakesh Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation - an international treaty of the Russian Federation not entered into force
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether this Protocol contradicts the Constitution of the Russian Federation — 1) as far as the procedure for its adoption is concerned, and 2) as to the contents of its provisions as far as the latter: а) entail the extension to the Russian Federation of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes which envisages the establishing and functioning of Dispute Settlement Body within the World Trade Organisation, and also b) establish specific obligations of the Russian Federation with regard to the admission to rendering legal services in the territory of the Russian Federation.
Subject areas:
Judgment of 29 June 2012 № 16-П on the review of constitutionality of the provisions of part 10 of Article 13 of the Federal law “On Arms” in connection with the complaints of the citizens G.V.Belokrinitskii and V.N.Teterin
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provision of the law is constitutional if it serves as a ground for prohibiting the acquisition of hunting fire-arms with rifled barrel by citizens who violated the rules of hunting, the rules of manufacturing, sale, transfer, acquisition, collecting or exhibiting, registration, bearing, transportation and use of arms, as well as trade thereof.
Subject areas:
Ruling of the Constitutional Court of 28 June 2012 № 1252-О on the refusal to accept for consideration the complaint of the Open Joint-Stock Company “Fabrika Proizvodstva Platkov” against the violation of constitutional rights and freedoms by Articles 337 and paragraph 1 of Article 352 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, and also paragraph 1 of Article 50 of the Federal law “On Mortgage (Pledge of Immovables)”
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provisions are constitutional, if – according to an interpretation given by courts, in particular by the Plenary Session of the Supreme Arbitrazh (Commercial) Court in its Decree of 17 February 2011 № 10 “On Certain Questions of the Application of Legislation on Pledge” - they do not permit the termination of the pledge in the event of such a change of the obligation secured thereby, which entails the increase of liability of the pledgor and the risk of his losing the pledged property.
Subject areas:
Ruling of the Constitutional Court of 28 June 2012 № 1274-О on the complaint of the citizen A.A.Baikulov against the violation of his constitutional rights by paragraphs 2 and 3 of part 2 of Article 30 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether there is a violation of the constitutionally guaranteed right of everyone to have his case heard in the court and by the judge within whose competence the case is placed by law, if a person is denied his right to jury trial on the ground that other persons accused within the same criminal case do not have the right to jury trial, so that with regard to them the case must be considered by a panel consisting of three professional judges of a federal court of general jurisdiction?
- Dissenting opinion:
- Aranovskiy Konstantin
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 27 June 2012 № 15-П on the review of constitutionality of paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 29, paragraph 2 of Article 31 and Article 32 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaint of the citizen I.B.Delova
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provisions are constitutional, since they do not imply the possibility of such restriction of person's dispositive legal capacity which is necessary for the protection of his rights because of mental disturbance and would be commensurate to his degree of ability to understand the significance of his actions and manage them, and thus deprive such citizen of the right to perform legally significant actions, including the disposal of a pension in order to satisfy his everyday needs.
- Dissenting opinion:
- Zhilin Gennadiy
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 7 June 2012 № 14-П on the review of constitutionality of provisions of subparagraph 1 of Article 15 of the Federal law “On Procedure for Leaving the Russian Federation and Entering the Russian Federation” and Article 24 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On State Secrecy” in connection with the complaint of citizen A.N.Ilchenko
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether these provisions justifiably restrict the right of persons, who were admitted to the State secrets and informed about the data of special importance or top-secret information, to leave the Russian Federation.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 5 June 2012 № 13-П on the review of constitutionality of provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 1086 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaint of the citizen Iu.G.Timashev
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provision of the Civil Code is constitutional, given that it is considered in law-application practice as enabling the plaintiff to confirm the amount of his lost earnings solely by the data contained in tax declarations, as a result of which for the individual entrepreneurs using the system of taxation in the form of unified tax on imputed income, the amount of earnings calculated thus turns to be less than their actual income, which precludes them from being compensated in full.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 18 May 2012 № 12-П on the review of constitutionality of provisions of part 2 of Article 20.2 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, paragraph 3 of part 4 of Article 5 and paragraph 5 of part 3 of Article 7 of the Federal law “On Assemblies, Meetings, Demonstrations, Manifestations, and Picketing” in connection with the complaint of the citizen S.A.Katkov
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provisions are constitutional, since they allow bringing the organiser of public action to administrative responsibility, if the actual number of participants of the given public action has exceeded the one declared in the notice on its holding.
- Dissenting opinion:
- Yaroslavtsev Vladimir
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 14 May 2012 № 11-П on the review of constitutionality of a provision of passage 2 of part 1 of Article 446 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in connection with complaints of citizens F.Kh.Gumerova and A.Iu.Shikunova
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the provision in question is constitutional, given that it does not allow (excepting the case of a mortgage) to levy execution on a dwelling apartment owned by the debtor, when such apartment is the sole place suitable for the permanent residence of the debtor and the members of his family?
- Dissenting opinion:
- Bondar Nikolay , Zhilin Gennadiy
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 23 April 2012 № 10-П on the review of constitutionality of the tenth passage of Article 2 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On the Employment of the Population in the Russian Federation" in connection with the complaint of the citizen E.N.Erlich
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested rules are constitutional, as far as they do not allow the recognition of a founder of an association of house-owners as an unemployed person, whereas the founders (or members) of other non-commercial organisations may under the same law be recognised as being unemployed, which gives then the right to unemployment benefits.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 30 March 2012 № 9-П on the review of constitutionality of part 2 of Article 4 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Privatisation of Housing Fund in the Russian Federation” in connection with the complaint of administration of the municipal formation “Zvenigovskii municipal district” of Marii El Republic
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provision, in violation of constitutional principles of equality and rule of law as well as constitutional prohibition against restrictions of rights of local self-government as to independent management of municipal property, does not allow the bodies of local self-government to adopt decisions in the form of a normative act concerning the privatisation of employment-related apartments in the absence of a special regional normative act to that effect.
- Dissenting opinion:
- Zhilin Gennadiy , Kazantsev Sergey
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of the Constitutional Court 27 March 2012 № 7-П on the review of constitutionality of provisions of part 2 of Art 29 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On Militia” and paragraph 1 of part 3 of Article 43 of the Federal law "On Police" in connection with the request of Zhelezhodorozhyi district court of Penza City
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provisions are constitutional as long as they establish a lower, as compared with general rules of the civil law, amount of compensation of harm caused to the family members and dependents of a member of staff of militia (or police) by the death of bread-winner resulting from a severe injury or another damage to health connected to his discharge of official duties.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 27 March 2012 № 8-П on the review of constitutionality of paragraph 1 of Article 23 of the Federal law “On the International Treaties of the Russian Federation” in connection with the complaint of citizen I.D.Ushakov
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether an international treaty of the Russian Federation (or a part thereof) which affects the rights, freedoms and duties of man and the citizen and at the same time establishes the rules, other than those envisaged by a law, may apply temporarily, provided that such a treaty was not officially published?
- Dissenting opinion:
- Zhilin Gennadiy , Gadzhiev Gadis
Subject areas:
Ruling of the Constitutional Court of 22 March 2012 № 447-О-О on the refusal to accept for consideration the complaint of the citizen M.V.Lykosov against the violation of his constitutional rights by Articles 96 and 97 of the Federal constitutional law "On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation"
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested rules (as recently amended) are in conformity with part 4 of Article 125 of the Constitution, as long as they allow a citizen to bring a complaint to the Constitutional Court only against the violation of his constitutional rights and freedoms by a law which had been already applied to his case and on the condition that the consideration of this case by the court was finished?
- Dissenting opinion:
- Gadzhiev Gadis
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Constitutional Court of 1 March 2012 № 5-П on the review of constitutionality of passage 2 of Art 215 and passage 2 of Art 217 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in connection with the complaints of citizens D.V.Barabash and A.V.Iskhakov
- Court:
- Constitutional Court
- Legal issue: whether the contested provisions are constitutional, as long as they obligate the court to suspend proceedings in the event of reorganisation of the legal person which is a party to the case at hand until its legal successor is determined, and as long as they do not enable the court to take into account the circumstances of the case, including the real possibility to decide the case and enforce the decision before the reorganisation is complete?
Subject areas:
Have you spotted a typo?
Highlight it, click Ctrl+Enter and send us a message. Thank you for your help!
To be used only for spelling or punctuation mistakes.