NAME OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

SOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

of May 14, 1999

According to the petition of Ademi limited liability company for recognition of Article unconstitutional and inappropriate to Item 2 7, to Item 3 of Article 15, to Items 3 and 4 of Article 79, to Item 3 of Article 84, to Item 2 of Article 88 and article 90 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic of the law-enforcement practice established by the decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of August 19, 1996 on case on the claim of the prosecutor of the city of Bishkek for the benefit of the state-owned business insurance company "Kyrgyzstan" to Ademi limited liability company about collection of the amount of 2340006 som

Constitutional court of the Kyrgyz Republic in structure: Chairman Bayekova Ch. T., vice-chairman Sutalinov A. A., Dryzhak P. N. judges, Kenensariyeva Ampere-second., Osmonova K. E., Satybekova S. S., Togoybayev Zh. Zh., Esenaliyeva K. E. and Esenkanova K. E.,

with participation of the court session secretary Nogoyev O. A. the storonpredstavitel of Ademi limited liability company of Chilnikina Tatyana Ivanovna who is acting on the basis of the power of attorney of December 1, 1998, signed by the chief executive of Ademi limited liability company and the representative of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of the Medetbekovy Plane tree Askarbekovna, acting on the basis of the power of attorney of December 1, 1998, the signed Chairman of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic, being guided by article 82 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic, article 13 of the Law "About the Constitutional Court of the Kyrgyz Republic" and article 11 of the Law "About the Constitutional Legal Proceedings of the Kyrgyz Republic" considered in proceeding in open court the petition of Ademi limited liability company for recognition of Article unconstitutional and inappropriate to Item 2 7, to Item 3 of Article 15, to Items 3 and 4 of Article 79, to Item 3 of Article 84, to Item 2 of Article 88 and article 90 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic of the law-enforcement practice established by the decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of August 19, 1996 on case on the claim of the prosecutor of the city of Bishkek for the benefit of the state-owned business insurance company "Kyrgyzstan" to Ademi limited liability company about collection of the amount of 2340006 som.

Having heard the report of the judge Satybekov S. S., speech of representatives of Ademi limited liability company of Chilnikina T. I. and Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of Medetbekova Ch. A., having researched case papers, the Constitutional court of the Kyrgyz Republic

Established:

In the Constitutional court of the Kyrgyz Republic the petition of Ademi limited liability company for recognition of Article unconstitutional and inappropriate to Item 2 7, to Item 3 of Article 15, to Items 3 and 4 of Article 79, to Item 3 of Article 84, to Item 2 of Article 88 and article 90 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic of the law-enforcement practice established by the decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of August 19, 1996 on case on the claim of the prosecutor of the city of Bishkek for the benefit of the state-owned business insurance company "Kyrgyzstan" to Ademi limited liability company about collection of the amount of 2340006 som arrived on November 23, 1998.

The Ademi limited liability company brings the following arguments into reasons for the requirements. The decision of the judge of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of August 19, 1996 satisfies the claim of the prosecutor of the city of Bishkek and the amount 1999663 som of 30 tyyyn is collected from Ademi limited liability company for benefit of the state-owned business insurance company "Kyrgyzstan".

Having accepted to the production and having considered the economic dispute referred to cognizance of Arbitration Court of the city of Bishkek on the first instance the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic violated the procedure of administration of law. According to Items 3 and 4 of article 79 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic the judge submits only to the Constitution and the law, the organization and procedure for activity of the courts are determined by the law. The decision, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic violated Item 2 of article 7 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic allowing implementation of the government by the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic only within the powers established by the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic. According to Item 3 of article 84 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic is granted only the right of implementation of supervision of judicial activities of Arbitration Courts of areas and the city of Bishkek, for considerations of economic disputes on the first instance it has no right.

According to Item 2 of article 19 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic the property is inviolable, its withdrawal without volition of the owner is allowed by a court decision. Implementation of the Kyrgyz Republic of law-enforcement practice by the Supreme Arbitration Court with violation of the constitutional principles of justice, general and single for all courts and judges fixed by article 90 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic entailed violation of their constitutional rights of the owner, on equal judicial protection and equality of all before the law and court, guaranteed by Item 3 of Article 15 and Item 2 of article 88 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic.

In judicial session representative of Ademi limited liability company Chilnikina T. I., having supported the petition, asked it to satisfy.

Representative of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic Medetbekova Ch. A., without having agreed with the petition, asks to leave it without satisfaction, and to stop the constitutional legal proceedings.

Constitutional court of the Kyrgyz Republic, having discussed arguments of the parties and having researched case papers, considers the petition of Ademi limited liability company subject to satisfaction on the following bases.

The decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of August 19, 1996 from the account of operation of the rent company "Ademi" for benefit of the state-owned business insurance company "Kyrgyzstan" recovers 1394200 som of principal debt and 556450 som of interests on credit. Other part of the claim it is refused. It is collected from the account of operation of the rent company "Ademi" in the income of the republican budget 44112 catfishes of the national duty and 4901 som of 30 tyyyn of the national duty in fund of development of Arbitration Courts of the Kyrgyz Republic.

According to Item 3 of article 84 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic exercises supervision of judicial activities of Arbitration Courts of areas and the city of Bishkek. Proceeding from requirements of Item 2 of article 7 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic represents and performs the government in the Kyrgyz Republic within the powers established by the Constitution.

Consideration of economic dispute between Ademi limited liability company and the state-owned business insurance company "Kyrgyzstan" about collection of the amount of 2340006 som, as Trial Court and decision making in essence, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic went beyond the constitutional powers, stipulated in Item 3 articles 84 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic.

Besides, the right of Ademi limited liability company to judicial protection guaranteed by Item 2 of article 38 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic which is subject to realization by justice implementation by court according to the procedure which is not contradicting the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic and not depriving of parties at variance of the right of appeal of the decision made by court on the substance of dispute is violated.

Under the specified circumstances, the Constitutional court of the Kyrgyz Republic considers the law-enforcement practice established by the decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of August 19, 1996 on case on the claim of the prosecutor of the city of Bishkek for the benefit of the state-owned business insurance company "Kyrgyzstan" to Ademi limited liability company about collection of the amount of 2340006 som, Article 7 unconstitutional and inappropriate to Item 2 and Item 3 of article 84 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic.

Based on stated and being guided by the subitem 8 of Item 3 of article 82 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic, articles 13 and 14 of the Law "About the Constitutional Court of the Kyrgyz Republic", articles 10, of 11, of 13, of 14, of 24, of 25, 29 and 30 Laws "About the Constitutional Legal Proceedings of the Kyrgyz Republic", the Constitutional court of the Kyrgyz Republic

Solved:

1. Recognize Article 7 unconstitutional and inappropriate to Item 2 and Item 3 of article 84 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic the law-enforcement practice established by the decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of August 19, 1996 in the claim of the prosecutor of the city of Bishkek for the benefit of the state-owned business insurance company "Kyrgyzstan" to Ademi limited liability company about collection of the amount of 2340006 som.

Satisfy the petition of Ademi limited liability company.

2. The decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Kyrgyz Republic of August 19, 1996 in the matter of No. 362/10 in the claim of the prosecutor of the city of Bishkek for collection from the account of operation of the rent company "Ademi" for benefit of the state-owned business insurance company "Kyrgyzstan" of 1394200 som of principal debt, 556450 som of interests on credit, about refusal in other part of the claim and with collection from the account of operation of the rent company "Ademi" in the income of the republican budget of 44112 som of the national duty and in fund of development of Arbitration Courts of the Kyrgyz Republic of 4901 som of 30 tyyyn of the national duty is not subject to execution.

3. The final decision, is not subject to appeal. Surely to execution by all state bodies, officials and citizens.

4. The decision to publish in "Sheets of Jogorku Kenesh of the Kyrgyz Republic", newspapers: "Tuusu's Kyrgyz", "Word of Kyrgyzstan", "Erkin Too" and "Our newspaper".

Disclaimer! This text was translated by AI translator and is not a valid juridical document. No warranty. No claim. More info