Lietuviškai
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF
LITHUANIA
DECISION
ON THE PETITION OF THE VISAGINAS CITY LOCAL COURT, THE
PETITIONER, REQUESTING TO INVESTIGATE WHETHER PARAGRAPH 3
(WORDING OF 11 NOVEMBER 2004) OF ARTICLE 3.194 OF THE CIVIL
CODE OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA IS NOT IN CONFLICT WITH THE
CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA
16 January 2006
Vilnius
The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania,
composed of the Justices of the Constitutional Court Armanas
Abramavičius, Toma Birmontienė, Egidijus Kūris, Kęstutis
Lapinskas, Zenonas Namavičius, Ramutė Ruškytė, Vytautas
Sinkevičius, Stasys Stačiokas, and Romualdas Kęstutis Urbaitis,
with the secretary of the hearing-Daiva Pitrėnaitė,
at the procedural sitting of the Constitutional Court
considered the 15 November 2005 petition of the Visaginas City
Local Court, requesting to investigate whether Paragraph 3
(wording of 11 November 2004) of Article 3.194 of the Civil
Code of the Republic of Lithuania to the extent that
establishes that "the court may adjudge support <...> when the
support is necessary to the child when he learns at day-time
departments of secondary, higher education or vocational
schools and he is not older than 24 years old" is not in
conflict with Paragraph 6 of Article 38 of the Constitution of
the Republic of Lithuania.
The Constitutional Court
has established:
The Visaginas City Local Court, the petitioner, was
investigating a civil case. By its ruling of 15 November 2005
the said court suspended the consideration of the case and
applied to the Constitutional Court with a petition requesting
to investigate whether Paragraph 3 (wording of 11 November
2004) of Article 3.194 of the Civil Code of the Republic of
Lithuania to the extent that establishes that " the court may
adjudge support <...> when the support is necessary to the
child when he learns at day-time departments of secondary,
higher education or vocational schools and he is not older than
24 years old" is not in conflict with Paragraph 6 of Article 38
of the Constitution. The petition of the petitioner was
received by the Constitutional Court on 5 December 2005.
The Constitutional Court
holds that:
1. Under Article 67 of the Law on the Constitutional Court
of the Republic of Lithuania, the courts shall apply by their
rulings with the petition requesting to decide whether a law or
other legal act is in compliance with the Constitution. The
suspended case of the court as well as the duplicate of the
whole text of the disputed legal act must be attached to the
ruling hereto.
Under Item 15 of Section 1 of Chapter VI of the Rules of
the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, the text
of the legal act which is announced in the official gazette
"Valstybės žinios" is to be considered such a duplicate.
The ruling of the court and the duplicate of the disputed
legal act are provided to the Constitutional Court in 30 copies
each.
2. The Visaginas City Local Court, the petitioner,
provided the Constitutional Court with 30 copies of the ruling
of 15 November 2005 of this court signed by the judge. It is to
be noted that these copies do not conform to the ruling of the
court in the civil case investigated by the Visaginas City
Local Court, attached to the petition for the Constitutional
Court because this ruling is not signed by the judge who
adopted it.
3. Even though the Visaginas City Local Court, the
petitioner, is disputing the compliance of Paragraph 3 (wording
of 11 November 2004) of Article 3.194 of the Civil Code with
the Constitution, he provided the Constitutional Court with the
duplicates of Paragraph 3 (wording of 18 July 2000) of Article
3.194 of the Civil Code (in 30 copies) that are not the
duplicates of the text announced in the official gazette
"Valstybės žinios".
4. It is to be held that the petition provided to the
Constitutional Court by the Visaginas City Local Court, the
petitioner, and the attachments thereto fail to comply with the
requirements set forth in Article 67 of the Law on the
Constitutional Court.
5. Under Article 70 of the Law on the Constitutional
Court, a petition that fails to comply with the requirements
set forth in Article 67 of this law, shall be returned to the
petitioner. The return of a petition shall not take away the
right to apply to the Constitutional Court according to the
common procedure after removal of the deficiencies thereof.
Conforming to Paragraph 3 of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of
Article 25, Articles 28 and 70 of the Law on the Constitutional
Court of the Republic of Lithuania and Chapter VI of the Rules
of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, the
Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania has adopted
the following
decision:
To return the Visaginas City Local Court, the petitioner,
the petition, requesting to investigate, whether Paragraph 3
(wording of 11 November 2004) of Article 3.194 of the Civil
Code of the Republic of Lithuania to the extent that
establishes that " the court may adjudge support <...> when the
support is necessary to the child when he learns at day-time
departments of secondary, higher education or vocational
schools and he is not older than 24 years old", is not in
conflict with Paragraph 6 of Article 38 of the Constitution of
the Republic of Lithuania.
Justices of the Constitutional Court: Armanas Abramavičius
Toma Birmontienė
Egidijus Kūris
Kęstutis Lapinskas
Zenonas Namavičius
Ramutė Ruškytė
Vytautas Sinkevičius
Stasys Stačiokas
Romualdas Kęstutis Urbaitis