 |
|
Complaint of unconstitutionality filed against articles 33 and 35 of the Organic Law on Jurisdictional Guarantees and Constitutional Control Cabezas & Cabezas-Klaere Law Firm filed an action of unconstitutionality against two juridical rules issued by the National Assembly contained in the Organic Law on Jurisdictional Guarantees and Constitutional Control, that for constitutional precautionary measures sets forth a prerogative in favor of the defendant – generally the State – to be able to appeal a judge’s denial to revoke such measures. Nevertheless, the plaintiff – generally private persons – lacks the possibility of resorting to a higher instance in case the requested precautionary measure is denied, with which the constitutional principle of access to legal protection, the right to defense, the principle of equality of arms, and the right to “doble conforme”. (See demand) - (See writ of admission) Complaint of unconstitutionality filed against article 58 of the Organic Law of the National Public Contracting System Cabezas & Cabezas-Klaere Law Firm filed an action of unconstitutionality against a juridical rule issued by the National Assembly contained in the Organic Law of the National Public Contracting System, which provides that in an expropriation trial based on a public utility or social interest declaration, the judge is obligated to subject to the municipal appraisal – regardless of the specific case analysis –, a situation that infringes the fair appraisal that authenticates the transfer, and significantly violates the constitutional rights to an effective legal protection, a due process, the right to defense, the right to property, and the constitutional principal of independence of functions. |
|
 |
|||
|
|||
