de 1789, le droit à la sûreté protégé par les articles 2 et 7 de cette Déclaration et la liberté individuelle protégée par l'article 66 de la Constitution ; que sur la question prioritaire de constitutionnalité

par ordonnance du conseiller de la mise en état ; que c'est encore en sa qualité de représentant du fonds qu'il a déféré l'ordonnance du 7 septembre 2021 et déposé une question prioritaire de constitutionnalité

violé le principe d'égalité garanti par les articles 6 et 16 de la Déclaration des droits de l'Homme et du citoyen de 1789 ; qu'il y a lieu, dès lors, de renvoyer une question prioritaire de constitutionnalité

        The High Court held that the constitutional right to communicate could be regulated by law and that prisoners retained only those constitutionally protected rights

Following an appeal by the first couple, the appeal court made a referral to the Constitutional Court regarding the constitutionality of the legislation.

    In 2000 several applications for a constitutional review of section   19 of the 1999 Act were lodged with the Constitutional Court, challenging the constitutionality of non-retroactive

Constitutional Court judgment no. 210 of 3 July 2013 14 .

to the Constitutional Court so that the question could be resolved.”

Constitutional Court Act 11.

Section 1 The Constitutional Court is the highest body of judicial authority for the protection of constitutionality, legality, human rights and basic freedoms...

Constitutional Court quash it as unconstitutional. 8 .

CLI of 2011 (Constitutional Court Act), challenging the constitutionality of sections 30(1)-(3) and 31 of the Police Act and section 26 of the Service Regulation.

In a leading judgment of 22   November 2000 the Federal Constitutional Court dismissed their application. The Federal Constitutional Court delivered four leading judgments on the land reform.

The Constitutional Court dismissed the appeals of the four applicants in the instant cases before the Court.

    The Constitutional Court noted that assessing the constitutionality of exceptions to the principle of protecting properly acquired rights required it to ascertain whether the individual’s

They maintained that the Court had recognised that even if the Constitutional Court was not competent to quash individual decisions, as its role was to rule on the constitutionality of laws, its decision

Federal Constitutional Law, in conjunction with Article 2 of the Basic Constitutional Act.”

They relied in their letter on a judgment of the Administrative Jurisdiction and Procedure Court (subsequently the “Constitutional Court”) of 26   May 2003.

The applicant filed a petition for the review of the constitutionality of the 2018 Decree, which was dismissed on the merits by the Constitutional Court by five votes to four.