Question

Розв'яжіть юридичну ситуацію. Громадянин Велеречивий звернувся до Конституційного Суду України зі скаргою на порушення його конституційного права діями і рішеннями міського голови щодо неправомірно встановлених тарифів за надані комунальні послуги. У скарзі він просив Конституційний Суд України перевірити законність встановлення тарифів та відмінити їх. Але Конституційний Суд України відмовив Велеречивому в прийнятті скарги. Чи правомірна відмова в прийнятті скарги? Відповідь обґрунтуйте.

Answer 1

Правомірна.спочатку громадянин Велеречивий має звернутися до районного суду, потім-до обласного, а уже в кінці-до Конституційного

Answer 2

Legal Situation Analysis

The situation involves a citizen, Veleretchiviy, who filed a complaint with the Constitutional Court of Ukraine regarding the illegitimate establishment of tariffs for municipal services by the city mayor. Veleretchiviy requested the Constitutional Court to verify the legality of the tariff establishment and to annul them. However, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine refused to accept Veleretchiviy's complaint. The question is whether the refusal to accept the complaint was justified.

Justification of the Refusal

The refusal to accept Veleretchiviy's complaint by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine may be considered justified based on the following legal considerations:

1. Jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court: The Constitutional Court of Ukraine has specific jurisdiction outlined in the Constitution of Ukraine. It primarily deals with constitutional matters, including the constitutionality of laws, acts of the President, the Verkhovna Rada, and the Cabinet of Ministers. The Court may not have jurisdiction over disputes related to municipal tariffs, which are typically under the jurisdiction of administrative or economic courts.

2. Legal Standing: In many legal systems, including Ukraine, individuals must have legal standing to bring a case before a court. This means they must demonstrate a sufficient connection to and harm from the issue at hand. The refusal to accept the complaint may be based on the lack of legal standing of Veleretchiviy to challenge the establishment of tariffs for municipal services.

3. Procedural Requirements: The Constitutional Court may have refused the complaint due to procedural deficiencies, such as failure to comply with the formal requirements for filing a complaint. This could include issues related to the timeliness of the complaint, exhaustion of other legal remedies, or failure to provide sufficient evidence or legal arguments.

Conclusion

Based on the provided information, the refusal of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to accept Veleretchiviy's complaint may be justified due to the Court's jurisdiction, legal standing, or procedural requirements. It's important to note that the specific legal grounds for the refusal would depend on the laws and regulations governing the Constitutional Court's jurisdiction and procedures in Ukraine.