Case law

CJEU Advocate General Athanasios Rantos has concluded that the temporary solidarity contribution on energy companies' windfall profits complies with EU law, as it is justified by the exceptional nature of the energy crisis and proportionate given its limited duration. The opinion is not a final CJEU ruling but signals the likely direction on such emergency-levy cases. Relevant for energy companies challenging solidarity contributions.

LV portāls explains the CJEU judgment of 15 October 2026 in case C-70/25, a Polish reference about roughly EUR 700 lost to phishing. The court held that the only exception to the duty of immediate refund is a reasoned suspicion of fraud notified in writing to the competent authority; suspected gross negligence alone does not suspend it. The provider may afterwards seek the loss from the customer if it proves the customer's fault.

A dispute over registering the "Borjomi" drink trademark raised the question of how far protection extends for well-known marks. The Industrial Property Board of Appeal ruled in a "Red Bull" opposition case, weighing the similarity of design elements and the overall impression of the marks. The decision gives businesses guidance on the limits of protection for a reputed trademark against similar signs.

In its judgment of 16 October 2026 in case No. 2025-22-03 the Constitutional Court held that point 2 of Daugavpils council's 2024 binding regulation No. 35, designating where gambling may not be organised, complies with Article 105 of the Constitution. The court found the restriction on licensed operators' property rights proportionate to the public benefit. The judgment is final and took effect on publication.

On 19 October the Constitutional Court opened a case on whether sub-clause 19.1 of the tender rules annexed to Cabinet Regulation No. 150 of 1 March 2022 complies with the first sentence of Article 91 of the Satversme (equality before the law). The provision, which ceased to apply on 12 September 2026, allowed state support for a household solar plant only if it was bought from a merchant registered in the Enterprise Register, not from a self-employed person registered with the tax authority. The Administrative District Court referred the question; the Cabinet must reply by 21.12.2026 and the preparation deadline is 19.03.2027.

Also reported by: lvportals.lv

The Supreme Court (Senāts) ruled on another dispute over Covid-19 downtime and wage-subsidy support, this time for a business only indirectly hit by the pandemic. The court again sided against the tax authority's position, widening the grounds on which such aid counts as justified. The ruling matters for companies still litigating older pandemic-support disputes with VID.

In late 2025 the Supreme Court set out new findings in cases on expelling a limited-liability company member, clarifying how to weigh a member's conduct and its bearing on the grounds for expulsion when several breaches are involved. The guidance fills gaps in case law on this fairly common type of dispute. Relevant for shareholders and boards deciding on member expulsion.

On 29 September 2026 the Zemgale district court partly upheld a claim by SIA "Stiga RM" against the Competition Council over a 2024 letter sent to a municipality about the "Norupe" sawmill merger. The court ordered the Council to correct the conclusions in that letter, and the Council has now dropped the matter rather than appeal further. The case shows businesses can successfully challenge a competition regulator's statements made to third parties.

Also reported by: lvportals.lv · kp.gov.lv

The Senate's civil cases department upheld an appellate ruling rejecting the Finance Ministry's request to cancel a registered lease right under Civil Law Article 416(7), confirming that a court cannot simply decline to apply a valid legal provision.

The Constitutional Court, in case No. 2025-22-03, upheld a Daugavpils municipal ban on gambling halls within 150 metres of homes, schools and social-service buildings. Gambling operators had argued the restriction disproportionately infringed their property rights, but the court found the municipality justified it by the risk of gambling addiction. The ruling leaves operators free to run halls elsewhere in the city.

The Constitutional Court has ruled that a Daugavpils municipal bylaw banning gambling halls whose entrance is within 150 metres of apartment buildings, schools or municipal institutions is compatible with the Constitution. The court found the restriction reduces the risk of unplanned exposure to gambling addiction while still allowing gambling halls to operate elsewhere in the city.

The Senate's Civil Cases Department upheld a Zemgale regional court ruling that refused the Finance Ministry's request to delete Land Register lease rights over a former garage cooperative's property, which passed to the state after the cooperative was struck off the register without liquidation. Reviewing the ancillary complaint, the Senate examined whether Civil Law Article 416(7) was constitutional and referred the question to the Constitutional Court, which found the provision unconstitutional where ownership is registered to the state. The Senate's ruling also sets out for lower courts how to prepare the legal grounds for such constitutional referrals going forward.

On 15 October the Court of Justice of the EU ruled in Case C-70/25 Tukowiecka that a payment service provider cannot refuse to immediately refund an unauthorised transaction on the ground that the customer was grossly negligent; such negligence may let the provider later seek reimbursement from the customer, but not delay the refund itself. The case arose from roughly EUR 700 of phishing fraud against a customer of Poland's PKO BP bank.

The paywalled piece covers the Senate's 17 September 2026 ruling in case SKA-761/2026, upholding a lower-court finding that the tax authority's decision to terminate a company's operations was disproportionate despite meeting the formal conditions.

On 15 October the Court of Justice of the EU ruled that banks cannot refuse to immediately reimburse an unauthorised payment solely on the grounds that the customer allegedly showed gross negligence. The case arose from a Polish woman's complaint over roughly €700 stolen after she clicked a phishing link; the court held that the amount must generally be refunded by the end of the next business day, except where the bank has well-founded suspicion of fraud by the customer that has been reported to the competent authorities.

On 13 October the Constitutional Court issued a decision in case No. 159/2026 setting out how to decide a request to recuse one of its judges, since the amended Constitutional Court Law no longer bars judge recusal but left no set procedure. The court ruled that the relevant chamber or duty session decides the request after hearing the challenged judge, by majority vote, with a tied vote meaning recusal.

The Constitutional Court declined to open a case on the Prosecutor General's application challenging two Cabinet of Ministers protocol decisions that set the pricing mechanism for long-term sawlog supply contracts of state company 'Latvijas valsts meži'. The court held these decisions are individual, not normative, acts, so reviewing them falls outside its jurisdiction. The ruling clarifies the line between normative and individual state-administration acts in a commercial-contract context.

The Constitutional Court declined to open a case on the Prosecutor General's challenge to two Cabinet of Ministers decisions on state-forestry timber pricing, ruling they are not normative acts and so cannot be contested by him.

The Constitutional Court declined to open a case on the Prosecutor General's petition against two 2023 and 2024 Cabinet protocol decisions that directed state forestry company "Latvijas valsts meži" to apply a specific pricing mechanism for sawlog sales. The court found the protocol decisions to be internal individual administrative acts rather than binding normative acts subject to constitutional review. The complaint was therefore not examined on the merits.

After a 18 February 2026 amendment lifted the ban on challenging a Constitutional Court judge's participation, the court's own rules of procedure had not yet set out how such a recusal request is decided. In a procedural sitting the court ruled that the panel or sitting handling the case decides the recusal, after hearing the judge concerned, by majority vote of the remaining members; a tie means the judge is recused.

On 13 October 2026 the Constitutional Court resumed a case on whether the rule requiring disclosure of shareholders' personal data under the Enterprise Register law complies with the constitutional right to data protection, brought by minority shareholders following a related CJEU ruling.

The Senate has paused one case and asked the Constitutional Court to review a rule that allows reopening court rulings that have already taken legal effect.

The article examines whether vague doubts about "financial reputation" can justify excluding a bidder from public procurement. In regulated procurements the list of exclusion grounds is exhaustive and authorities cannot add their own criteria, as confirmed by Senate case No. SKA-87/2026 involving state postal company Latvijas Pasts. In non-regulated procurements authorities have more discretion, but a decision must still be objectively justified and applied equally to all bidders.

The Supreme Court's Senate suspended proceedings in case SKK-J-314/2026 and asked the Constitutional Court to assess a transitional provision that, after amendments to the Criminal Procedure Law, allows already final court rulings on criminally obtained real estate to be reopened. The Senate believes the rule may breach separation of powers and the right to a fair trial, undermining legal certainty. The dispute concerns an apartment that an earlier ruling ordered returned to the victim, while a good-faith acquirer wants to keep it.

The Senate's Administrative Cases Department has suspended proceedings on an order requiring state company "Latvijas Vides, ģeoloģijas un meteoroloģijas centrs" to stop publishing an applicant's submitted information online, since deciding the case requires a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice of the EU on interpreting EU law. The case concerns the limits of disclosing information in waste management.

On 8 October (press release No 145/2026) Advocate General Laila Medina delivered her opinion in Case C-222/25 concerning Estonia's financial intelligence unit, finding that the relevant EU directive applies to personal-data processing by financial intelligence units. The opinion says data subjects' access to their own data may be restricted, but any restriction must be proportionate and backed by safeguards against misuse — relevant to the practice of Latvia's own Financial Intelligence Unit.

On 6 October 2026 the Economic Affairs Court fully upheld AS "Rīgas kuģu būvētava"'s claim and voided its sale of real estate in Ādaži to SIA "MNT." The court found the deal was a related-party transaction under Commercial Law Section 184.1 that did not meet market terms, and that the company's legal-protection (insolvency) process did not exempt it from the Section 184.2 approval procedure. The ruling is not yet final and may be appealed.

The Constitutional Court summarized September's litigation: it ruled that rules allowing a person's release from debt without assessing their assets are unconstitutional (case No. 2025-23-01, 30 Sep 2026). It also reopened the case on publishing shareholders' personal data following a CJEU ruling, and declined to open a case on the form of assignment (cesija) contracts. Published 7 Oct 2026.

Also reported by: ifinanses.lv

Ruling on a COBALT client's case, the Senate found that Article 20 of the Damage Compensation Law fails to address a situation where a person is not notified that a criminal process has ended, even though that moment starts the six-month deadline for claiming compensation. The client's funds of over EUR 2.4 million had been frozen, the process was closed in February 2025, but the client only learned of it in September after requesting information himself, leading the prosecution and courts to reject his claim as time-barred. The Senate held that this gap conflicts with the right to adequate compensation under Article 92 of the Satversme.

The article reviews case law on the line between fair references to another brand in advertising and using someone else's brand as a tool to boost one's own reputation. It looks at when such references cross into trademark infringement.

Sworn advocate Normunds Šlitke criticizes the Senate Civil Department's 11 March 2026 ruling in case SKC-154/2026 on the validity of an apartment lease signed by an estate administrator, pointing to internal inconsistency in its reasoning about when the contract was made. He argues the Senate, by relying on the 2025 inheritance-law reform and an unproven testator's "wish," effectively crossed the line between interpreting the law and creating new rights, re-evaluating evidence beyond a cassation court's role. The piece invokes former Constitutional Court chair Sanita Osipova's warnings about "judicial law-making."

iFinanses compiled what its editors consider the most notable Senate rulings in civil cases from September 2026, including case SKC-122/2026 on employees' priority right to continued employment during staff reductions. The roundup is meant as a practical guide to current case law.

A parallel roundup covers September rulings by the Senate's Administrative Cases Department, including case SKA-768/2026 on the limits of the Senate's own competence. It helps readers track current administrative-court practice.

The roundup covers Senate rulings in tax cases published in September, including the criteria for treating a board member's remuneration of five minimum monthly wages as labour-tax-liable income regardless of how many group companies paid it, and the conditions for recognising a recipient of intellectual-property income as self-employed.

The roundup covers Senate rulings in commercial-law cases published in September, including the criteria for treating a board member's pay as labour-tax-liable income, and a case on whether a merchant's core business in an energy-intensive manufacturing sector is a precondition for a tax relief.

The Senate (Supreme Court) quashed an Administrative Regional Court ruling and remanded for fresh review a case in which the Competition Council fined the Jelgava municipality for abuse of dominance after it awarded a waste-management contract to a partly-owned company without a tender. Following a preliminary question to the CJEU on the concept of "market participant," the Senate found the regional court had misapplied it.

The Senate (Supreme Court) ruled that a Cabinet regulation basing the minimum age for calculating work tenure on the Soviet-era Labour Code is inapplicable, and remanded a disability-pension recalculation case to the Administrative Regional Court. The claimant had sought to have her full period of work on a Soviet collective farm counted, but the agency had only partially credited it.

Also reported by: lvportals.lv

Under a September 2026 Senate ruling in case SKC-646/2026, Latvian law does not allow a debtor to be forced to accept an inheritance for creditors' benefit. Article 689 of the Civil Law states no one is obliged to accept an inheritance, protecting a person's right to accept or renounce it. An insolvency administrator can manage a debtor's existing assets but cannot compel acceptance of new inheritance rights; however, the Insolvency Control Service warned in 2024 that an unjustified renunciation of inheritance may be treated as bad-faith conduct with consequences in insolvency proceedings.

The Senate's Administrative Cases Department overturned an Administrative Regional Court ruling that had rejected Jelgava municipality's appeal against a Competition Council fine for abuse of dominant position. The municipality had awarded waste-management rights to a partly municipally-owned company without a tender. The Senate found the lower court misapplied the "market participant" concept and, after consulting the CJEU, concluded the municipality's waste-management activity is a public-authority function rather than a commercial one; the case goes back for reconsideration.

The Court of Justice of the EU ruled in Case C-900/24 that EU law precludes a national rule under which price increases stemming from an unfair contract term can no longer be challenged once three years have passed without objection - such a rule effectively preserves the unfair term's effects against the consumer. The Court also found it incompatible with the Unfair Contract Terms Directive for a supplier to be allowed to unilaterally rewrite a price-adjustment clause after it is declared void, rather than leaving that to the national court.

The Constitutional Court opened case No. 2026-16-0103 on a company's challenge to the law and Cabinet Regulation No. 888 provisions that set the land redemption price when forced shared ownership in apartment buildings is terminated. The applicant argues that pricing based on cadastral value fails to reflect market value and violates the property-rights guarantee in Article 105 of the Constitution. The court will assess whether the rules are constitutional.

The Union of Greens and Farmers has collected 20 Saeima deputies' signatures to petition the Constitutional Court to assess whether the adopted hospital-reform model complies with the Constitution.

The Senate's Civil Department overturned a lower court ruling in a case about a lease agreed by an estate administrator, which co-heirs sought to void. It clarified that missing guardianship-court approval affects procedure, not the contract's validity, and that an administrator's duty is preserving the estate, not generating profit. The case (SKC-22/2026) was returned to the Vidzeme Regional Court for a new hearing.

On September 18 the Constitutional Court began hearing case No. 2025-22-03 on a Daugavpils municipal by-law banning gambling within 150 metres of certain buildings. Three licensed gambling operators filed the challenge, arguing the restriction breaches their property and business rights under Article 105 of the Satversme. A ruling is due within 30 days of the hearing.

The Court of Justice of the EU ruled that the mere fact that a plane ticket was bought online does not mean the court of the passenger's place of residence has jurisdiction over a claim for compensation for lost baggage. The ruling clarifies international jurisdiction rules in consumer and carriage disputes, relevant also to Latvian businesses and consumers entering online contracts with foreign service providers.

Responding to a preliminary reference from a Spanish court, the CJEU clarified how the Montreal Convention applies to a passenger's claim for lost luggage on a domestic flight booked online from her home. The Court held that the carrier's "place of business" where the contract was concluded cannot be read as the passenger's home simply because the ticket was bought online, which affects where a passenger may sue an airline for damages.

The paywalled article discusses an Administrative District Court ruling, which the State Revenue Service did not appeal, on from what point a taxpayer stops being treated as a debtor once the SRS later grants an extension of the tax payment deadline, and thus when the SRS may publish information about a tax debt.

Also reported by: sorainen.com

In a ruling awarding compensation to a patient for the consequences of surgery, the Senate sharply criticised the Health Inspectorate and Health Ministry for trying to reduce the payout by relying on an internal, legally non-binding "harm assessment" table. The Senate held that an agency's internal rules cannot override the law and that courts must independently set a fair compensation amount where an agency misapplied the law; the ruling also addressed how much detail a doctor must give a patient about possible surgical complications.

The paywalled article on Senate findings explains how far a person's right extends to ask an authority to use a communication channel other than the official e-address, and how this affects the rules for serving documents.

The Riga Regional Court dismissed a claim against the public broadcaster and journalists over a TV segment discussing the consequences of certain lending practices. The claimant had sought a retraction, removal of the segment and €100,000 in damages, but the court found the interviewee's statements were subjective opinion with sufficient factual basis. The court held that critical opinion is protected when it has adequate factual grounding, giving weight to the public interest in the reporting.

On 10 September 2026 the Supreme Court Senate declined to open cassation proceedings in a case on demolishing a building in Jūrmala's cultural-historical protection zone, where the Administrative Regional Court had found the municipality's and the heritage inspectorate's refusal disproportionate. During the proceedings the monument's status changed from national to local significance, moving the matter into municipal competence and leaving the inspectorate without standing to appeal. As a result, the owner's right to demolish the building stood.

Juristavards.lv reports that the Senate's Administrative Cases Department declined to initiate cassation proceedings in a case over an owner's request to demolish a residential building and place a cottage in its stead within Jūrmala's protected cultural-historical area.

The article analyses two CJEU rulings (cases C-163/24 and C-293/24) on state liability when a national court fails to refer a preliminary question to the CJEU. The Court held that liability arises only when this is combined with a breach of an EU law provision that grants rights to individuals. A failure to refer alone does not trigger state liability.

On 8 September 2026 the Constitutional Court resumed a case on whether a Commercial Register Law provision requiring publication of all shareholders' personal data, including minority shareholders, complies with the Constitution. Proceedings had been stayed pending a CJEU preliminary ruling, which on 3 September found that EU law does not require publishing all shareholders' data and that doing so without checking a legitimate interest breaches the GDPR. A hearing is scheduled for 13 October 2026.

LSM.lv reports that the EU General Court on Wednesday rejected Russian businessman Roman Abramovich's third attempt to overturn EU sanctions imposed on him in 2022 over Russia's war in Ukraine. The court found the listing lawful because Abramovich held stakes in metals companies Evraz and Norilsk Nickel, which provided substantial revenue to the Russian government. Since the war began, the EU has sanctioned nearly 3,000 people and entities, freezing more than €28 billion.

The CJEU, in case C-298/23, examined a Belgian political party's campaign that used the "IKEA" brand for an immigration-policy message without the trademark owner's consent. The Court ruled that invoking freedom of expression alone is not sufficient justification for using a well-known trademark, and that good faith and the owner's interests must also be weighed. The case was referred back to the national court.

The CJEU Advocate General issued an opinion in cases C-271/25 and C-334/25 confirming that member states may set exclusion grounds in public procurement on national-security grounds, provided such rules comply with the EU proportionality principle. In Latvia this function is performed by the Procurement Monitoring Bureau. The CJEU's final judgment is still pending.

On September 8 the Constitutional Court resumed proceedings in case No. 2024-01-01 concerning a Commercial Register Law provision that requires mandatory disclosure of capital company shareholders' personal data. The move follows the CJEU's September 3 ruling in case C-798/24 "Jautiva", which found EU law does not require disclosing all shareholders' data, including minority holders, without an assessed legitimate interest. A written-procedure hearing is set for October 13.

The Riga Regional Court dismissed a defamation claim over public statements made about litigation between a private individual and a representative of the Latvia Academy of Sciences; the plaintiff had sought retraction and compensation. The court found the statements to be opinion rather than factual assertions, falling within the bounds of freedom of expression. The 14 May 2026 judgment became final after the Supreme Court refused to open cassation proceedings.

On 4 September the Riga City Court declared void the Daugavpils municipality's order dismissing Santa Pupiņa, head of the liquidated Urban Planning and Construction Department, reinstated the employment relationship and, at the claimant's request, terminated it by court judgment. The municipality was ordered to pay EUR 13,012.65 for forced absence from work and EUR 2,051.68 in litigation costs; the claim for EUR 3,000 in moral damages was rejected. The court found a breach of the requirements of Section 108 of the Labour Law on assessing employees and a failure to prove the need for the reorganisation. The judgment may be appealed.

On 3 September 2026 the Court of Justice of the European Union, in case C-798/24 (Jautiva), initiated following an application by 17 minority shareholders of a joint-stock company to the Constitutional Court, ruled that EU law does not require public access to shareholder register information and that the GDPR precludes rules providing for the disclosure to anyone of the personal data of all shareholders (identity, contact details, number of shares, voting rights). The Court noted that the objectives of business transparency, AML/CTF and sanctions do not justify general public access, since the data can be stored and disseminated. The Constitutional Court will now assess whether Latvia's rules on disclosure of shareholder data comply with the Constitution; amendments to the Commercial Law and the Enterprise Register rules are expected. The clients were represented by COBALT (L. Liepa, G. Šantare, M. Aktumane).

On 3 September 2026 the European Court of Human Rights rejected a complaint against Latvia alleging that the state had failed to provide sufficient rules against forced labour and servitude (Article 4 of the Convention). The Court found that Latvia has an adequate legal framework (the Constitution, the Criminal Law) and that the authorities had carefully investigated the applicant's allegations of exploitation, including unpaid wages and living conditions controlled by the employer.

On 2 September the Economic Affairs Court issued a ruling in a criminal case imposing a coercive measure — compulsory liquidation — on SIA "Rīgas mikroautobusu satiksme" over alleged bribery of an official to secure favourable regulation for the company and its indirect owner. The ruling confirms that courts can order a company's forced dissolution as a form of corporate liability for involvement in a crime, a significant consequence for any business entity.

The Court of Justice of the European Union, answering questions from the Constitutional Court in a case initiated by 17 minority shareholders of various joint-stock companies, held that Directive 2017/1132 does not require the disclosure of information on all shareholders of a joint-stock company. Latvia's rules, which provide for unrestricted online publication of shareholders' names, personal identity numbers, addresses, e-mails, number of shares and voting rights, constitute a serious interference with fundamental rights and are incompatible with the General Data Protection Regulation if access is not subject to conditions (such as demonstrating a legitimate interest). The Court pointed to less restrictive alternatives – access based on a legitimate interest, or publication only in respect of sanctioned persons.

In a preliminary ruling on questions referred by the Constitutional Court, the Court of Justice of the European Union held that EU law does not require the disclosure of information on all shareholders of a joint-stock company, including minority shareholders, and that Latvia's rules – Section 4.15(2)(b) of the Law on the Enterprise Register of the Republic of Latvia, which provides for publication of shareholder data in the public part of the register – do not provide sufficient safeguards against misuse, since the data are available for bulk download by unidentified users. The Court pointed to less restrictive solutions, such as access after verification of a legitimate interest. The Constitutional Court must now rule on the provision's compliance with the Constitution.

The Court of Justice of the European Union held that EU law does not require shareholders' personal data to be published online, and that Latvia's requirement to publish shareholders' names, personal identity numbers, addresses and shareholding data in a freely accessible and downloadable form violates the rights to privacy and data protection guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The measure is neither appropriate nor necessary for the objective of an open business environment, and Latvia lacks sufficient safeguards against misuse of the data.

A digest of the Supreme Court Senate's August 2026 rulings in administrative cases: renting out residential property is not economic activity for real estate tax purposes (SKA-83/2026); a gambling licence cannot be restricted on the basis of general public disapproval without a justification tied to the specific location (SKA-57/2026); a court may order an authority to issue a corrected administrative act on real estate tax (SKA-83/2026); interim protection against a Competition Council order is permissible where compliance requires substantial system changes (SKA-734/2026); in an unregulated procurement the assessment of a bidder's reputation must be objectively justified (SKA-87/2026).

The Constitutional Court has begun assessing whether the provisions of the Law on the Release of Natural Persons from Debt Obligations, which allow a person to be released from part of their obligations if their income and debts do not exceed the statutory thresholds and the person meets the social criteria, comply with the Constitution. The application was filed by debt collection service providers that purchase and recover debts out of court; they argue that the amendments in force since 21 January 2025 substantially widened the circle of persons eligible for release and reduced the value of debt portfolios purchased at market price, infringing property rights and legitimate expectations. The case is being examined in written proceedings, with a ruling due within 30 days after the hearing.

A Russian-language article on the case opened at the Constitutional Court concerning provisions of the Law on the Release of Natural Persons from Debt Obligations which, after the amendments of 21 January 2025, allow a wider circle of persons to be released from obligations if their income and debts do not exceed the statutory thresholds and the person meets the social criteria. The application was filed by debt collection companies that purchased the debts at market price, arguing that the provisions substantially reduce the value of their portfolios and violate property rights and the principle of legitimate expectations. A ruling is due within 30 days after the court hearing.

On 2 September 2026 the Constitutional Court began examining case No. 2025-23-01 on the compliance of Section 4(1)(2) and (5) and Section 5(1)(2) and (2) of the Law on the Release of Natural Persons from Debt Obligations with Articles 1 and 105 of the Constitution (Satversme). The application was filed by a licensed debt collection service provider that purchases and recovers debts out of court; it considers that the provisions excessively widen the circle of persons eligible for release and substantially reduce the value of its debt portfolio, infringing property rights and the principle of legitimate expectations. The case is being examined in written proceedings; a ruling must be adopted within 30 days after the court hearing.

The Constitutional Court has initiated a case on the compliance with the Constitution of provisions of the Law on the Release of Natural Persons from Debt Obligations – provisions allowing a person to be released from debts if their income and the amount of their obligations are below the statutory thresholds and the social criteria are met. The application was filed by a licensed debt collection company, which argues that widening the circle of eligible persons has substantially reduced the value of its portfolio of claims purchased at market price, violating property rights and the principle of legitimate expectations.

The Patent Office reports that in August the Industrial Property Appeals Board issued one written decision, in a trademark case over the sign "VITAMIN PERFORMANCE POWER (fig.)" (case No. RIAP/2026/M-24-1066). The decision is now public in the Board's database, letting businesses and lawyers review its reasoning and outcome on trademark-protection questions.

In August the Supreme Court added 24 rulings of the Senate's Department of Administrative Cases to its case-law classifiers. The most important theses for businesses: renting out a flat or house for residential purposes is not economic activity for the purpose of applying the real estate tax rate (SKA-83/2026); the Competition Council must justify a legal obligation with considerations of expediency and proportionality, and the need to rebuild a platform's processes may justify interim protection (SKA-734/2026); a licensed payment institution in an unregulated procurement has discretion to assess bidders' reputation, subject to the prohibition of arbitrariness and the principle of equality (SKA-87/2026); a creditor's subjective public rights in proceedings to strike a company off the commercial register are limited to the procedural rights provided for in the Commercial Law (an application to appoint a liquidator) (SKA-744/2026); an authority may not formally reject a request to use another communication channel instead of the official e-address (SKA-685/2026).

The Supreme Court Senate overturned a conviction and terminated criminal proceedings for misappropriation against a company's authorised representative who received goods from a German supplier but did not pay the invoice in full. As the parties had not agreed on the moment of transfer of ownership, German law applied, under which the goods became the buyer's property upon delivery – so the person was dealing with their own company's assets. A dispute over an unpaid invoice is to be resolved in civil proceedings, not criminal proceedings.

Also reported by: juristavards.lv

The Senate's Criminal Cases Department terminated criminal proceedings against a businessman accused of large-scale embezzlement, ruling the dispute over unpaid German-supplied goods was a civil commercial matter, not a crime. Under applicable German law, ownership passed to the recipient's company at delivery, so he managed his own, not another's, property; the case now goes to civil courts.

The Supreme Court's Administrative Cases Department overturned a regional court ruling that had granted a former judge, whose term ended at the age limit, a right to severance pay, and remitted the case for reconsideration.

In case No. SKA-139/2026, the Senate overturned an appellate ruling and held that a former judge whose term ended due to reaching the maximum age limit has no right to severance pay. The Senate found the legislator deliberately excluded this ground from judges' compensation rules, unlike other dismissal grounds for state officials; the Justice Ministry had earlier refused payment.

Latvian fuel and oil products trader WO Trading has filed a case with the EU Court, challenging changes to customs duties on goods of Russian and Belarusian origin. Latvia's government on Tuesday approved the state's position in "WO Trading v European Parliament and Council", stressing its sanctions policy remains unchanged.

Company K2 Ventum has sharply criticised the government's refusal to approve its wind park project, calling the decision legally unfounded and pointing to serious procedural breaches after more than three years of assessment. The company plans to defend its rights in court, provisionally valuing a possible claim against the state at up to €120 million.

The article (paywalled, only the lead is visible) reports that on 31 July 2026, in case SKA-112/2026, the Supreme Court issued a significant interpretation of the presumed-income rule for board members within corporate groups under the Personal Income Tax Law.

The article (paywalled, only the lead is visible) describes a 13 May 2025 judgment in case A420126422, in which the Administrative Regional Court drew a line between reasonable due-diligence checks on a business partner and the burden of proof the tax authority may impose.

The article (paywalled, only the lead is visible) reports that on 31 July 2026, in case SKC-35/2026, the Supreme Court set out new findings on dismissing an employee during probation, partly departing from earlier case law on the employee's available remedies.

On 20 August, Prosecutor General Armīns Meisters petitioned the Constitutional Court over two Cabinet of Ministers protocol decisions that had instructed the Agriculture Ministry to adjust prices in long-term contracts between state forestry company "Latvijas valsts meži" and private timber buyers for softwood logs from 2024 onward. The Prosecutor General argues the government, without statutory authorisation, allowed state property to be sold below the prices set in existing civil contracts, in breach of the Constitution.

Also reported by: lsm.lv

Prosecutor General Armins Meisters has filed with the Constitutional Court against two Cabinet decisions on pricing in long-term timber supply contracts, saying the government exceeded its powers. He called the move itself, taking the government to the Constitutional Court, unprecedented.

The Constitutional Court opened a case on a provision that allows compensation for wrongfully applied property arrest only after the related criminal case concludes. The applicant argues this violates the rights to a fair trial and adequate compensation, since a person with no procedural standing in that criminal case should not depend on its outcome. This is already the second such case the court has opened on the issue.

The subscriber-only article analyses a court ruling that draws a line between reasonable due-diligence checks and excessive demands placed on a business partner in tax-related matters.

The Senate's Civil Cases Department declined to open cassation proceedings in a case where an actor sought retraction of false statements broadcast on TV. A Riga Regional Court ruling requiring the broadcaster to retract the information stands, while the claim for moral damages was rejected. Case No. SKC-526/2026.

COBALT reviews July 2026 Latvian administrative court practice on tax disputes, stressing that factual evidence outweighs formal paperwork — for instance in cases of unproven mineral extraction or subcontractor arrangements. The Senate refused a compensation claim by the tax authority lacking a detailed calculation, and courts reiterated that board members must actively oversee operations and supply full documentation to tax authorities on request.