U-I-22/99

Reference no.:
U-I-22/99
Objavljeno:
Official Gazette RS, No. 1/2000 and OdlUS VIII, 273 | 02.12.1999
ECLI:
ECLI:SI:USRS:1999:U.I.22.99
Act:
Denationalization Act (Official Gazette RS, Nos. 27/91, 56/92 - dec. CC, 31/93 - dec. CC, 31/93, 24/95 - dec. CC, 20/97 - dec.

CC, 23/97 - dec. CC, 65/98 - dec. CC and 60/99 - dec. CC) (ZDen), Art. 72.2
Operative provisions:
Art. 72.2 of the Denationalization Act is not inconsistent with the Constitution.
Abstract:
The challenged provision of Art. 72.2 of the Denationalization Act can be interpreted by means of interpretative methods in a manner such that it makes possible claims to be filed before the finality of a denationalization decision. Thus, the challenged provision is not inconsistent with Art. 2 of the Constitution.

There are different types of denationalized property or different forms of denationalization. Therefore, by the nature of things, it is impossible for denationalization claimants to be in an equal position. The position of individual denationalization claimants differs in view of their claims on account of different circumstances of a particular case, from which what depends is particular the height of damage caused to these entitled persons, since they could not have managed or used their nationalized property until the finality of denationalization decisions. Thus, the challenged regulation is not in violation of the principle of equality before the law (Art. 14 of the Constitution).
Password:
Denationalization, compensation due to the impossibility of using and managing property since the introduction of the Denationalization Act.
Principle of a State governed by the rule of law.
Equality before the law.
Denationalization, entitlements of denationalization claimants.
Denationalization, the protection of the legal position of denationalization claimants.
General principles of the legal order, the principle of good faith.
Constitutional Court, an interpretative decision of the Constitutional Court.
Statute, interpretation.
Concurring opinion of a Constitutional Court judge.
Dissenting opinion of a Constitutional Court judge.
Legal basis:
Constitution, Arts. 2, 33
Constitutional Court Act (ZUstS), Art. 21
Document in PDF:
Type of procedure:
review of constitutionality and legality of regulations and other general acts
Type of act:
statute
Applicant:
Housing Fund of Celje Municipality Municipal Council of Tolmin Municipality
Date of application:
21.01.1999
Date of decision:
02.12.1999
Type of decision adopted:
decision
Outcome of proceedings:
establishment – it is not inconsistent with the Constitution/statute
Document:
AN01863