Lietuviškai
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF
LITHUANIA
RULING
ON THE COMPLIANCE OF ITEM 3 OF THE PROCEDURE OF
THE TRANSFER OF BUILDINGS OR PREMISES BELONGING TO
THE STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS BY RIGHT OF
OWNERSHIP FOR SHARES (WORDINGS 4 FEBRUARY 1999 AND
14 APRIL 2000) WHICH WAS APPROVED BY GOVERNMENT OF
THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA RESOLUTION NO. 120 "ON
THE PROCEDURE OF THE TRANSFER OF BUILDINGS OR
PREMISES BELONGING TO THE STATE OR LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS BY RIGHT OF OWNERSHIP FOR SHARES" OF 4
FEBRUARY 1999 WITH PARAGRAPH 5 OF ARTICLE 20 OF
THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA LAW ON THE POSSESSION,
USE AND DISPOSAL OF STATE-OWNED AND MUNICIPAL
PROPERTY (WORDING OF 12 MAY 1998)
21 August 2002
Vilnius
The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania,
composed of the Justices of the Constitutional Court Armanas
Abramavičius, Egidijus Jarašiūnas, Egidijus Kūris, Kęstutis
Lapinskas, Zenonas Namavičius, Augustinas Normantas, Jonas
Prapiestis, Vytautas Sinkevičius, and Stasys Stačiokas,
with the secretary of the hearing-Daiva Pitrėnaitė,
in the presence of:
the representative of the Government of the Republic of
Lithuania, the party concerned, who was Rimantas Stanevičius, a
lawyer of the Legal Division of the State Property Fund,
pursuant to Articles 102 and 105 of the Constitution of
the Republic of Lithuania and Article 1 of the Republic of
Lithuania Law on the Constitutional Court, on 14 August 2002 in
its public hearing heard Case No. 43/01 which originated in a
petition of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania, the
petitioner, requesting to determine whether the provisions of
Item 3 of the Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or
Premises Belonging to the State or Local Governments by Right
of Ownership for Shares (wording of 4 February 1999) which was
approved by Government of the Republic of Lithuania Resolution
No. 120 "On the Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or
Premises Belonging to the State or Local Governments by Right
of Ownership for Shares" of 4 February 1999 stating that the
premises may not be transferred for shares if the enterprises
pointed out in Item 1 of this procedure are behindhand with the
rent payment, are in arrears overdue for the State Budget of
the Republic of Lithuania, also whether the provisions of the
same item (wording of 14 April 2000) stating that the premises
may not be transferred for shares if the enterprises pointed
out in Item 1 of this procedure are behindhand with the rent
payment, are in arrears overdue for the State Budget (local
government budget) of the Republic of Lithuania, and the State
Social Insurance Fund Budget, were in compliance with Paragraph
5 of Article 20 of the Republic of Lithuania Law on the
Possession, Use and Disposal of State-owned and Municipal
Property (wording of 12 May 1998).
The Constitutional Court
has established:
I
1. On 12 May 1998, the Seimas enacted the Republic of
Lithuania Law on the Possession, Use and Disposal of
State-owned and Municipal Property (Official Gazette Valstybės
žinios, 1998, No. 54-1492; hereinafter also referred to as the
Law).
On 4 February 1999, the Government adopted Resolution No.
120 "On the Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or Premises
Belonging to the State or Local Governments by Right of
Ownership for Shares" (Official Gazette Valstybės žinios, 1999,
No. 15-391), whereby the Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings
or Premises Belonging to the State or Local Governments by
Right of Ownership for Shares (hereinafter also referred to as
the Procedure) was approved. On 14 April 2000, the Government
adopted Resolution No. 427 "On the Partial Amendment of
Government of the Republic of Lithuania Resolution No. 120 'On
the Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or Premises
Belonging to the State or Local Governments by Right of
Ownership for Shares' of 4 February 1999" (Official Gazette
Valstybės žinios, 2000, No. 32-907).
2. The Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania, the
petitioner, was investigating an administrative case. The said
court suspended the investigation of the case by its order and
addressed the Constitutional Court with a petition requesting
to determine whether the provisions of Item 3 of the Procedure
of the Transfer of Buildings or Premises Belonging to the State
or Local Governments by Right of Ownership for Shares which was
approved by Government Resolution No. 120 "On the Procedure of
the Transfer of Buildings or Premises Belonging to the State or
Local Governments by Right of Ownership for Shares" of 4
February 1999 stating that the premises may not be transferred
for shares if the enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of this
Procedure are behindhand with the rent payment, are in arrears
overdue for the State Budget (local government budget) of the
Republic of Lithuania, and the State Social Insurance Fund
Budget, were in compliance with the provisions of Paragraph 5
of Article 20 of the Law on the Possession, Use and Disposal of
State-owned and Municipal Property.
II
The request of the petitioner is based on the following
arguments.
Paragraph 5 of Article 20 of the Law establishes the
conditions under which the buildings or premises belonging to
the state or local governments by right of ownership the list
whereof is approved by a Seimas resolution on the proposal of
the Government, upon their evaluation according to the Law on
the Privatisation of State-Owned and Municipal Property, may,
under procedure established by the Government, be transferred
for shares to a newly established or functioning joint-stock
company or private company. By Item 3 of the Procedure of the
Transfer of Buildings or Premises Belonging to the State or
Local Governments by Right of Ownership for Shares approved by
Resolution No. 120 "On the Procedure of the Transfer of
Buildings or Premises Belonging to the State or Local
Governments by Right of Ownership for Shares" of 4 February
1999, the Government established that the premises may not be
transferred for shares if the enterprises pointed out in Item 1
of this Procedure are behindhand with the rent payment, are in
arrears overdue for the State Budget (local government budget)
of the Republic of Lithuania, and the State Social Insurance
Fund Budget. The petitioner maintains that Paragraph 5 of
Article 20 of the Law on the Possession, Use and Disposal of
State-owned and Municipal Property does not provide for such
conditions. The Law on the Possession, Use and Disposal of
State-owned and Municipal Property does not put requirements
for an enterprise of private capital not to be behindhand with
the rent payment, not to be in arrears overdue for the State
Budget (local government budget) of the Republic of Lithuania,
and the State Social Insurance Fund Budget. The Law
commissioned the Government to establish a procedure under
which state-owned property is transferred to enterprises of
private capital, however, it did not granted powers to the
Government to establish additional conditions of the transfer
of the premises for shares. The petitioner doubts whether the
provisions of Item 3 of the aforesaid Procedure are in
conformity with the provisions of Paragraph 5 of Article 20 of
the Law.
III
In the course of the preparation of the case for the
Constitutional Court hearing, written explanations were
received from the representative of the Government, the party
concerned, who was R. Stanevičius, a lawyer of the Legal
Division of the State Property Fund.
The representative of the party concerned noted that the
Law regulates the procedure and conditions of possession, use
and disposal of state-owned and municipal property as well as
the powers of state and self-governance institutions in this
area as much as this is not regulated by other laws concerning
the possession and/or use and/or disposal of such property.
Paragraph 5 of Article 20 of the Law provides that the
buildings or premises which belong to the state or local
governments by right of ownership the list whereof is approved
by a Seimas resolution upon the proposal of the Government,
upon their evaluation according to the Law on the Privatisation
of State-Owned and Municipal Property, may, under procedure
established by the Government, be transferred for shares to a
newly established or functioning joint-stock company or private
company provided such a company, upon receiving, under
procedure established by the Government, a permit to do major
repairs in the same buildings or premises, invested, under
procedure established by laws until 26 July 1996, private
capital the value of which comprises more than 1/2 of the
buildings' or premises' value and provided no bankruptcy
procedure has been instituted against the said company and no
out-of-court bankruptcy procedure has been initiated as regards
the same company.
The representative of the party concerned maintains that
the legislature specified in the Law that in certain cases the
property belonging to the state by right of ownership may be
transferred to a private capital company under procedure
established by the Government. This provision is to be
interpreted together with Paragraph 3 of Article 20 of the Law
which provides that the Government shall adopt a decision on
long-term and short-term investments concerning substantive
property belonging to the state by right of ownership. Article
20 of the Law does not point out in what cases the said
transfer is obligatory: it merely establishes minimal
requirements, and the Government is commissioned to take the
final decision. By the disputed resolution the Government
implemented the legal norm on the establishment of the transfer
procedure, thus realising the right to adopt the decision and
particularising the legal provision "property may be
transferred".
In the opinion of the representative of the party
concerned, the state, conforming to the principle of
proportionality, must strive for the harmonisation of public
and private interests. Therefore, it is just reasonable that
before transferring the premises to the private capital company
one requires that such an enterprise perform its duties for the
state, e.g., cover tax arrears or pay the rent fee for the use
of the property belonging to the state by right of ownership.
In the opinion of R. Stanevičius, Item 3 of the Procedure
approved by Government Resolution No. 120 "On the Procedure of
the Transfer of Buildings or Premises Belonging to the State or
Local Governments by Right of Ownership for Shares" of 4
February 1999 is in compliance with Paragraph 5 of Article 20
of the Law on the Possession, Use and Disposal of State-owned
and Municipal Property.
IV
In the course of the preparation of the case for the
Constitutional Court hearing, written explanations were
received from R. Valentukevičius, a Seimas ombudsman, A.
Zuokas, Mayor of the Vilnius City Municipality, K. Virketis,
Director of the Law Department of the Office of the Seimas,
Prof. T. Birmontienė, Head of the Constitutional Law
Department, the Law Academy of Lithuania.
The Constitutional Court
holds that:
I
1. On 12 May 1998, the Seimas enacted the Republic of
Lithuania Law on the Possession, Use and Disposal of
State-owned and Municipal Property Article 20 whereof regulated
the relations of long-term and short-term investments
concerning state-owned and municipal substantive property.
The Government approved the Procedure of the Transfer of
Buildings or Premises Belonging to the State or Local
Governments by Right of Ownership for Shares by its Resolution
No. 120 "On the Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or
Premises Belonging to the State or Local Governments by Right
of Ownership for Shares" of 4 February 1999.
The Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania, the
petitioner, requests to determine whether the provisions of
Item 3 of the Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or
Premises Belonging to the State or Local Governments by Right
of Ownership for Shares which was approved by Government
Resolution No. 120 "On the Procedure of the Transfer of
Buildings or Premises Belonging to the State or Local
Governments by Right of Ownership for Shares" of 4 February
1999 stating that the premises may not be transferred for
shares if the enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of this
Procedure are behindhand with the rent payment, are in arrears
overdue for the State Budget (local government budget) of the
Republic of Lithuania, and the State Social Insurance Fund
Budget, were in compliance with the provisions of Paragraph 5
of Article 20 of the Law on the Possession, Use and Disposal of
State-owned and Municipal Property.
2. Item 3 of the procedure was amended for several times.
2.1. Item 3 of the Procedure approved by Government
Resolution No. 120 "On the Procedure of the Transfer of
Buildings or Premises Belonging to the State or Local
Governments by Right of Ownership for Shares" of 4 February
1999 prescribed that the premises may not be transferred for
shares if against the enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of this
Procedure bankruptcy cases are instituted or either
out-of-court bankruptcy or liquidation procedures are
commenced, or provided their own capital is less than 3/4 of
the capital pointed out in their articles of association, if
they are behindhand with the rent payment, are in arrears
overdue for the State Budget of the Republic of Lithuania or
are insolvent according to the Republic of Lithuania Law on
Enterprise Bankruptcy.
By Government Resolution No. 427 "On the Partial Amendment
of Government of the Republic of Lithuania Resolution No. 120
'On the Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or Premises
Belonging to the State or Local Governments by Right of
Ownership for Shares' of 4 February 1999" of 14 April 2000 Item
3 of the Procedure was amended and set forth as follows: "The
premises may not be transferred for shares if against the
enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of this Procedure bankruptcy
cases are instituted, or out-of-court bankruptcy procedures are
commenced, or there has been a court decision to announce that
a respective enterprise is liquidated due to bankruptcy or the
liquidation procedure of the enterprise is commenced, which is
regulated by the Republic of Lithuania Law on Enterprise
Bankruptcy, or provided the capital of the enterprise is less
than 3/4 of the capital pointed out in its articles of
association, if it is behindhand with the rent payment, is in
arrears overdue for the State Budget (local government budget)
of the Republic of Lithuania, and the State Social Insurance
Fund Budget."
By Government Resolution No. 79 "On the Partial Amendment
of Government of the Republic of Lithuania Resolution No. 120
'On the Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or Premises
Belonging to the State or Local Governments by Right of
Ownership for Shares' of 4 February 1999" of 22 January 2000
Item 3 of the Procedure was amended and set forth as follows:
"The premises may be transferred for shares to the enterprises
pointed out in Item 1 of this Procedure provided bankruptcy
cases are not instituted against them, or out-of-court
bankruptcy or liquidation procedures are not commenced in their
regard."
2.2. The petitioner doubts whether the provisions of Item
3 of the Procedure that the premises may not be transferred for
shares if against the enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of this
Procedure are behindhand with the rent payment, are in arrears
overdue for the State Budget (local government budget) of the
Republic of Lithuania, or the State Social Insurance Fund
Budget are in compliance with Paragraph 5 of Article 20 of the
Law. The provisions the compliance of which with Paragraph 5 of
Article 20 of the Law are doubted by the petitioner were set
forth in the wordings of 4 February 1999 and 14 April 2000.
3. By the Law on the Amendment of the Law on the
Possession, Use and Disposal of State-owned and Municipal
Property enacted by the Seimas on 23 May 2002, the Law on the
Possession, Use and Disposal of State-owned and Municipal
Property was amended and set forth in a new wording. The
provisions of Paragraph 5 of Article 20 of the Law (wording of
12 May 1998) which are pointed out by the petitioner were
abolished in the Law on the Possession, Use and Disposal of
State-owned and Municipal Property (wording of 23 May 2002).
4. Under the Constitution, only the Constitutional Court
shall decide whether the laws and other legal acts adopted by
the Seimas are in conformity with the Constitution and whether
legal acts adopted by the President of the Republic and the
Government of the Republic are in conformity with the
Constitution or laws (Paragraph 1 of Article 102). Paragraph 1
of Article 110 of the Constitution provides that judges may not
apply laws which conflict with the Constitution. Under
Paragraph 2 of the same article, in cases when there are
grounds to believe that the law or other legal act applicable
in a certain case conflicts with the Constitution, the judge
shall suspend the investigation and shall appeal to the
Constitutional Court to decide whether the law or other legal
act in question complies with the Constitution.
These constitutional provisions mean that in cases when a
court investigating a case, after it questions the compliance
of the law applicable in the case with the Constitution or the
compliance of another act adopted by the Seimas, the President
of the Republic or the Government with the Constitution or the
laws, appeals to the Constitutional Court, the latter has a
duty to consider the petition of the said court regardless of
the fact whether the disputed law or another legal act is valid
or not.
Under Paragraph 4 of Article 69 of the Law on the
Constitutional Court, the annulment of a disputable legal act
shall be grounds to adopt a decision to dismiss the initiated
legal proceedings. The provisions of Paragraph 4 of Article 69
of the Law on the Constitutional Court may not be construed
without taking into consideration the provisions of Article 110
of the Constitution. The formula "shall be grounds to adopt a
decision to dismiss the initiated legal proceedings" employed
in Paragraph 4 of Article 69 of the Law on the Constitutional
Court is to be construed as establishing the right to the
Constitutional Court, in cases when not courts but the other
entities pointed out in Article 106 of the Constitution
appealed to the Constitutional Court, while taking account of
the circumstances of the case, to dismiss the initiated legal
proceedings, but not as establishing that in every case when
the disputed legal act was annulled the instituted legal
proceedings must be dismissed.
It needs to be noted that after the Supreme Administrative
Court of Lithuania, the petitioner, appealed with the petition
requesting to determine whether the disputed provisions of Item
3 of the Procedure (wordings of 4 February 1999 and 14 April
2000) approved by Government Resolution No. 120 "On the
Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or Premises Belonging to
the State or Local Governments by Right of Ownership for
Shares" of 4 February 1999 were in compliance with Paragraph 5
of Article 20 of the Law (wording of 12 May 1998), in case the
Constitutional Court had not decided this issue in essence, the
doubts of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania would
not be removed as regards the compliance of the disputed
provisions of the Procedure with the Law.
5. Subsequent to the petition of the petitioner, the
Constitutional Court will consider whether the provisions of
Item 3 of the Procedure (wording of 4 February 1999) that the
premises may not be transferred for shares if the enterprises
pointed out in Item 1 of this Procedure are behindhand with the
rent payment and are in arrears overdue for the State Budget of
the Republic of Lithuania, and whether the provisions Item 3 of
the Procedure (wording of 14 April 2000) that the premises may
not be transferred for shares if the enterprises pointed out in
Item 1 of this Procedure are behindhand with the rent payment
and are in arrears overdue for the State Budget (local
government budget) of the Republic of Lithuania, and the State
Social Insurance Fund Budget, were in compliance with Paragraph
5 of Article 20 of the Law (wording of 12 May 1998).
II
1. Paragraph 5 of Article 20 of the Law (wording of 12 May
1998) specified:
"The buildings or premises which belong to the state or
local governments by right of ownership the list whereof is
approved by a Seimas resolution upon the proposal of the
Government, upon their evaluation according to the Law on the
Privatisation of State-Owned and Municipal Property, may, under
procedure established by the Government, be transferred for
shares to a newly established or functioning joint-stock
company or private company provided such a company, upon
receiving, under procedure established by the Government, a
permit to do major repairs in the same buildings or premises,
invested, under procedure established by laws until 26 July
1996, private capital the value of which comprises more than
1/2 of the buildings' or premises' value and provided no
bankruptcy procedure has been instituted against the said
company and no out-of-court bankruptcy procedure has been
initiated as regards the same company and if the buildings or
premises meet at least one of the following conditions:
1) not less than 1/2 of the main constructions have been
changed;
2) the general area or capacity has been increased by more
than 1/3;
3) more than 1/2 of the engineering communications have
been changed or new ones have been installed;
4) part of the works pointed out in Items 1, 2 and 3 of
Paragraph 5 of this Article have been performed or the
technological equipment or manufacturing facilities have been
installed, while in the case of its dismantling essential
damage might be inflicted to the building or premises."
Thus, Paragraph 5 of Article 20 of the Law (wording of 12
May 1998) inter alia established conditions which had to be
satisfied by a newly established or functioning joint-stock
company or private company to which the buildings or premises,
which belong to the state or the local government by right of
ownership, the list whereof is approved by a Seimas resolution
upon the proposal of the Government and upon their evaluation
according to the Law on the Privatisation of State-Owned and
Municipal Property, might be transferred for shares.
2. On 4 February 1999, the Government adopted Resolution
No. 120 "On the Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or
Premises Belonging to the State or Local Governments by Right
of Ownership for Shares" whereby the Procedure of the Transfer
of Buildings or Premises Belonging to the State or Local
Governments by Right of Ownership for Shares was approved. Item
3 of the Procedure (wording of 4 February 1999) prescribed:
"The premises may not be transferred for shares if against the
enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of this Procedure bankruptcy
cases are instituted or either out-of-court bankruptcy or
liquidation procedures are commenced, or provided their own
capital is less than 3/4 of the capital pointed out in their
articles of association, if they are behindhand with the rent
payment, are in arrears overdue for the State Budget of the
Republic of Lithuania or are insolvent according to the
Republic of Lithuania Law on Enterprise Bankruptcy."
It was inter alia established in the above item of the
Procedure that the premises may not be transferred for shares
to the enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of this Procedure
(i.e. newly established or functioning joint-stock companies or
private companies) if they are behindhand with the rent payment
and are in arrears overdue for the State Budget of the Republic
of Lithuania.
Upon the partial amendment of Government Resolution No.
120 "On the Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or Premises
Belonging to the State or Local Governments by Right of
Ownership for Shares" of 4 February 1999 made by Government
Resolution No. 427 "On the Partial Amendment of Government of
the Republic of Lithuania Resolution No. 120 'On the Procedure
of the Transfer of Buildings or Premises Belonging to the State
or Local Governments by Right of Ownership for Shares' of 4
February 1999" of 14 April 2000, Item 3 of the Procedure
(wording of 14 April 2000) specified: "The premises may not be
transferred for shares if against the enterprises pointed out
in Item 1 of this Procedure bankruptcy cases are instituted, or
out-of-court bankruptcy procedures are commenced, or there has
been a court decision to announce that a respective enterprise
is liquidated due to bankruptcy or the liquidation procedure is
commenced, which is regulated by the Republic of Lithuania Law
on Enterprise Bankruptcy, or provided the capital of the
enterprise is less than 3/4 of the capital pointed out in its
articles of association, if it is behindhand with the rent
payment, is in arrears overdue for the State Budget (local
government budget) of the Republic of Lithuania, the State
Social Insurance Fund Budget."
Thus, Item 3 of the Procedure (wording of 14 April 2000)
inter alia established additional conditions when the premises
may not be transferred for shares to the enterprises pointed
out in Item 1 of the Procedure: they are in arrears overdue for
the local government budget and the State Social Insurance Fund
Budget.
3. The Constitutional Court has noted in its rulings for
more than once that norms of the law are realised by a
substatutory legal act, however, such a legal act may not
replace the law itself or create new legal norms of general
character which would compete with the norms of the law.
Otherwise, the supremacy of laws in respect to substatutory
acts which is established in the Constitution would be
violated.
The Government resolution is a substatutory legal act. It
may not contain any legal norms competing with those of the
law.
4. Comparing the disputed provisions of Item 3 of the
Procedure (wordings of 4 February 1999 and 14 April 2000) with
the provisions of Paragraph 5 of Article 20 of the Law (wording
of 12 May 1998), one can notice that the conditions contained
in Item 3 of the Procedure (wording of 4 February 1999) that
the premises may not be transferred to the enterprises pointed
out in Item 1 of the Procedure for shares if they are
behindhand with the rent payment, are in arrears overdue for
the State Budget of the Republic of Lithuania, and the
conditions contained in Item 3 of the Procedure (wording of 14
April 2000) that the premises may not be transferred to the
enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of the Procedure for shares
if they are behindhand with the rent payment, are in arrears
overdue for the State Budget (local government budget) of the
Republic of Lithuania and the State Social Insurance Fund
Budget, had not been established in Paragraph 5 of Article 20
of the Law (wording of 12 May 1998).
Thus Item 3 of the Procedure (wordings of 4 February 1999
and 14 April 2000) established additional conditions for the
enterprises, which had not been provided for in the Law, and
under which the premises could not be transferred for shares
under procedure established by the Government. It needs to be
noted that it was not permitted for the Procedure to establish
additional or different conditions from those provided for in
Paragraph 5 of Article 20 of the Law, which had to be met by
the enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of the Procedure to which
the premises might be transferred for shares under procedure
established by the Government.
5. On the grounds of the arguments set forth, one is to
conclude that the provisions of Item 3 of the Procedure
(wording of 4 February 1999) that the premises may not be
transferred to the enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of the
Procedure for shares if they are behindhand with the rent
payment, are in arrears overdue for the State Budget of the
Republic of Lithuania, and the provisions of Item 3 of the
Procedure (wording of 14 April 2000) that the premises may not
be transferred to the enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of the
Procedure for shares if they are behindhand with the rent
payment, are in arrears overdue for the State Budget (local
government budget) of the Republic of Lithuania and the State
Social Insurance Fund Budget, were in conflict with in
Paragraph 5 of Article 20 of the Law (wording of 12 May 1998).
Conforming to Articles 102 and 105 of the Constitution of
the Republic of Lithuania and Articles 1, 53, 54, 55 and 56 of
the Republic of Lithuania Law on the Constitutional Court, the
Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania has passed
the following
ruling:
To recognise that the provisions of Item 3 of the
Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or Premises Belonging to
the State or Local Governments by Right of Ownership for Shares
(wording of 4 February 1999) that the premises may not be
transferred to the enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of the
Procedure for shares if they are behindhand with the rent
payment, are in arrears overdue for the State Budget of the
Republic of Lithuania and the provisions of the same item
(wording of 14 April 2000) that the premises may not be
transferred to the enterprises pointed out in Item 1 of the
Procedure for shares if they are behindhand with the rent
payment, are in arrears overdue for the State Budget (local
government budget) of the Republic of Lithuania and the State
Social Insurance Fund Budget, which was approved by Government
of the Republic of Lithuania Resolution No. 120 "On the
Procedure of the Transfer of Buildings or Premises Belonging to
the State or Local Governments by Right of Ownership for
Shares" of 4 February 1999, conflicted with Paragraph 5 of
Article 20 of the Republic of Lithuania Law on the Possession,
Use and Disposal of State-owned and Municipal Property (wording
of 12 May 1998).
This Constitutional Court ruling is final and not subject
to appeal.
The ruling is promulgated on behalf of the Republic of
Lithuania.