Konstitucijai prieštaraujančių teisės aktų pašalinimo iš teisės sistemos atidėjimas Lietuvos ir užsienio valstybių konstitucinių teismų praktikoje.
MetadataShow full item record
Removal by the Constitutional Court ruling of a non-constitutional law or other legal act from the legal system may result in appearance of gaps in legal regulation, as well as in other undesirable consequences. Avoiding the problems related with changes in the legal system that occur after elimination of non-constitutional provisions, various measures are being applied in practise of constitutional courts of foreign countries. The postponement of the term when non-constitutional legal acts lose their force is prevailing. In this article one surveys substantial peculiarities of the practise of constitutional courts of foreign countries as well as of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania applying the institution of postponement. One also discusses basic arguments by means of which the constitutional courts of various countries justify their decisions to postpone the elimination of non-constitutional provisions from the legal system. Some theoretical and practical aspects of the legal consequences of such decisions are being discussed as well. The constitutions and/or the laws of a number of countries provide constitutional courts, after they recognise a law of other legal act as being in conflict with the Constitution, with the discretion to postpone the term when this legal act loses its force. After the decision of a constitutional court, prolonging to a particular term the application of non-constitutional provisions in order to avoid gaps in legal regulation until respective amendments are adopted, comes into force, the legislator is under a legal obligation to implement this decision and to amend the non-constitutional legal regulation until the defined term.
- Articles / Straipsniai