U-I-4/99

Reference no.:
U-I-4/99
Objavljeno:
Official Gazette RS, No. 12/99 and OdlUS VIII, 145 | 10.06.1999
ECLI:
ECLI:SI:USRS:1999:U.I.4.99
Act:
Local Self-government Act (Official Gazette RS, Nos. 72/93, 6/94 - dec. CC, Nos. 45/94 - dec. CC, 57/94, 14/95, 20/95 - dec. CC, 63/95 - mandatory interpretation, 9/96 - dec. CC, 44/96 - dec. CC, 26/97, 70/97 and 74/98) (ZLS), Arts. 51.b.3, 51.c, 100.1,2,6 and 100.a
Operative provisions:
Arts. 51.b.3, 51.c and 100.1,2,6 of the Local Self-government Act are annulled. The request of the Mayor of Vodice Municipality for the review of the constitutionality of Art. 100.a of the Local Self- government Act is rejected. Until the municipalities do not enter into agreements on the division of property and the regulation of mutual property relations: - transactions of the regular administration of the undivided joint property are made by the bodies of the municipality in whose territory the property is situated, given the consent of all municipalities established on the territory of previous individual municipalities, and - the rights to found public institutes, public companies or funds are exercised by the bodies of the municipality in which the registered office of the public institute, public company or fund, is situated, given the consent of all municipalities for whose territory the public institute, public company or fund was established.
Abstract:
The Constitutional Court annulled Art. 100.1 of the Local Self- government Act (hereinafter: ZLS), since it determines time limits which were illogical and non-executable in view of the beginning of the coming into force of the Amendment to ZLS-98.

Such determination of time limits is in violation of the principle of a State governed by the rule of law (Art. 2 of the Constitution).

The Constitutional Court annulled Art. 51.b.1 and Art. 100.6 of ZLS, since they were in violation of the principles of a State governed by the rule of law (Art. 2 of the Constitution) and the principle of guaranteeing local self-government (Art. 9 of the Constitution). The challenged provisions gave to municipalities only the formal, not actual, possibility to reach an agreement on the division of property. The envisaged statutory division of the joint property of municipalities puts certain municipalities which participate in the agreement-making procedure in an unequal position and in fact negates agreement- making. The challenged provisions do not follow the legislature's goal, i.e. to foster the agreement-making procedure of municipalities on the division of joint property, but, in contrast, prevent it. Simultaneously, they also interfere with the competence of local communities to independently determine their mutual property relations.

Since the Constitutional Court restored the previous regulation of the division of joint property among municipalities, it also restored in Point 3 of the disposition the previous regulation concerning the management of joint property and concerning the exercise of the rights to foundation. The challenged regulation interferes with the rights of individual municipalities to which they have been entitled since their foundation, or deprives them of the right to participation in management and the exercise of the rights to foundation in the final phase of agreement-making. The matter thus concerns the violation of the principles of a State governed by the rule of law, in particular the principle of trust in the law. The principles of a State governed by the rule of law do not allow the legislature to change the legal positions of subjects during agreement-making procedures, which are in the case of a majority of municipalities in their final phase, or, in this respect, the agreements concerning a certain part of property were already reached, without having justified reasons for such interferences. Thus, the Constitutional Court annulled Art. 51.b.3 and Art. 100.2 of ZLS for the same reasons as Art. 51.c and Art. 100.6 of ZLS. In Point 3 of the disposition it restored the regulation which had applied before the Amended ZLS came into force (Art. 100.a and Constitutional Court Decision No. U-I-75/96).
Password:
Constitutional Court, temporary injunction (statute).
Local self-government, municipalities, the division of property, the regulation of property relations.
Constitutional Court, the determination of the implementation of a Constitutional Court decision.
Principle of trust in the law.
Right to local government.
Principle of legal certainty.
Principle of a law-governed and social State.
Partially dissenting opinion of a Constitutional Court judge.
Legal basis:
Constitution, Arts. 2, 9
Constitutional Court Act (ZUstS), Arts. 25, 40.2, 43
Document in PDF:
Type of procedure:
review of constitutionality and legality of regulations and other general acts
Type of act:
statute
Applicant:
Mayors of the Municipalities of Preddvor, Cerklje, Šenčur and others
Date of application:
08.01.1999
Date of decision:
10.06.1999
Type of decision adopted:
decision
Outcome of proceedings:
annulment or annulment ab initio
Document:
AN01821