The
Su pr eme Cou rt
o f Est o n i a
ius est ars boni et aequi
Ta b l e o f c o n t e n t s z
1.Estonian court system
4
1.1. Constitutional court system
1.2. Principles of development of the court system
4
5
2.The Supreme Court
6
2.1.Proceedings in the Supreme Court
2.1.1. Recourse to the Supreme Court
2.1.2. Proceedings in the Supreme Court
2.1.3. Judgment of the Supreme Court
6
6
8
9
2.2.Structure of the adjudication of justice 2.2.1. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
2.2.2. Civil Chamber
2.2.3. Administrative Law Chamber
2.2.4. Criminal Chamber
2.2.5. Constitutional Review Chamber
2.2.6. Supreme Court en banc
11
13
14
14
15
17
18
2.3.The Supreme Court as the guarantor of the judges’ self-government
2.3.1. The Court en banc
2.3.2. Council for Administration of Courts
2.3.3. Disciplinary Chamber
2.3.4. The judge’s examination committee
2.3.5. The Judicial Training Council
19
19
20
21
22
23
2.4.The Supreme Court administration
24
2.5.Foreign relations of the Supreme Court
27
3.History
28
3.1.History of Estonia’s court system
3.1.1. Creation of court system 1918−1920
3.1.2. Estonia’s courts 1920−1940
3.1.3. The end of the court system in 1940
3.1.4. Re-establishment of court system 1990−1993
3.1.5. Estonia’s courts 1993−2008
28
28
29
29
30
31
3.2.History of the Supreme Court
31
4.Information
34
4
1 E s t o n i a n c o u r t s y s t e m z
1.1.
Constitutional court system
The Constitution of the Republic of Estonia establishes that justice shall be administered solely
by the courts. The courts shall be independent in their activities and shall administer justice in accordance with the Constitution and the laws. According to the spirit of the Constitution the court
system of Estonia forms a uniform whole, having the exclusive competence to perform the function of administration of justice and being separated from both the executive and the legislative
powers in the performance of this duty.
Estonia’s court system consists of three instances: county and administrative courts are the first
instance courts; circuit courts are the courts of the second instance, and the Supreme Court is the
third instance. The formation of emergency courts is prohibited by the Constitution.
The structure of Estonia’s court system is one of the simplest in Europe. The peculiarity of the system lies in the fact that the Supreme Court performs simultaneously the functions of the highest
court of general jurisdiction, of the supreme administrative court as well as of the constitutional
court.
There are 244 judges employed in Estonia’s court system.
Yet, the administration of the courts in Estonia is not independent and separate from the executive power. The first and second instance courts are financed from the state budget through
the budget of the Ministry of Justice. Courts of the first instance and courts of appeal are administered in co-operation between the Ministry of Justice and the Council for Administration of
Courts. The Supreme Court, being an independent constitutional institution, administers itself
and is financed directly from the state budget.
County courts
Harju, Pärnu, Tartu
and Viru County Courts
Administrative courts
the Tallinn and Tartu
Administrative Courts
Circuit
Courts
the Tallinn and
the Tartu
Circuit Court
The
Supreme
Court
situated
in Tartu
According to the Constitution of the Republic of Estonia the Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court is appointed to office by the parliament Riigikogu, on the proposal
of the President of the Republic. Justices of the Supreme Court are appointed to
office by the Riigikogu, on the proposal of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
Other judges are appointed to office by the President of the Republic, on the proposal of the Supreme Court.
5
1.2. Principles of development of the court system
One of the momentous factors in the development of Estonia’s courts is definitely the fact that
the judges have worded the principles of development of the court system. The discussion about
the development of the court system’s self-organisation, its financing and administration culminated in February 2007, when the Court en banc comprised of all Estonian judges approved the
principles of development of the court system. The document concerning the principles of development of the court system as an independent branch of power, for the first time in the history of the Republic of Estonia, set out the directions and objectives of its development.
In March 2008 the Minister of Justice established a working group to prepare the amendments to
the legislation regulating judicial administration and organisation.
Principles of development of the court system
Resolution of the Court en banc of 9 February 2007
EXTRACT
1.Estonia’s court system is a constitutional institution which, on the basis of the
principle of separate and balanced powers, is independent in its activities.
2. The court system operates as an independent power, responsible for the functioning of the administration of justice on the basis and pursuant to the procedure established by laws. [...]
4. To assure the development of the court system observing fundamental values
and functioning pursuant to established requirements it is important to regulate the duties and structure of the court system, to develop the financing
and administration of the curt system, to deepen the self-managerial elements
thereof, and to promote the personnel policy of the court system and training.
[...]
7. For further development of the principle of separate powers the administration
of courts should be separated from the executive power. To guarantee the administration and development of courts an independent administrative authority is to be established, which is a part of the single court system in legal and organisational senses and subjected to the management model of the court system
as a whole.
8. The court system is managed on the basis of the principle of self-management,
which is exercised through the activities of the Court en banc, the Council for
Administration of Courts, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, chairmen
of courts, full court, director general of the administrative authority of courts
and directors of courts. [...]
15. The budget of the court system, separated from the budget of the Ministry of
Justice, must become a stable all-inclusive budget of the system of administration of justice, the development priorities of which are established for at least
three years. [...]
6
2 T h e S u p r e m e C o u r t z
The Constitution of the Republic of Estonia establishes that the Supreme Court is the highest
court in the state and shall review court judgments by way of cassation proceedings. The Supreme Court is also the court of constitutional review.
In addition to the duties of the Supreme Court in administration of justice, arising from the Constitution and the procedural laws, the Courts Act imposes on the Supreme Court several tasks relating to ensuring appropriate administration of justice throughout the court system.
The Supreme Court
2.1. Proceedings in the Supreme Court
2.1.1. Recourse to the Supreme Court
In the cases established in procedural law a person may file an appeal in cassation, appeal against
a ruling or a petition for the review of a court decision.
If a participant in a proceeding is of the opinion that the circuit court has materially violated a
provision of procedural law or incorrectly applied a provision of substantive law, the participant
in the proceeding may file an appeal against the judgment or the ruling of the circuit court. It is
only in judicial proceedings of misdemeanour matters that a participant in the proceeding may
file an appeal in cassation against a judgment of a county court.
It is possible to file a petition for the review of a court decision which has entered into force. For
example, when there is another fact or evidence relevant to the case which existed at the time
of making the court decision but was not known and could not have been known to the party at
that time, and submission or relying of such fact or evidence in the proceeding would have evidently resulted in a different court decision.
It is required that a person filing an appeal in cassation or an appeal against a ruling or a petition
for the review of a court decision with the Supreme Court have a qualified representative. In administrative matters an appeal in cassation or an appeal against a ruling or a petition for the review of a court decision may be filed by a participant in a proceeding personally, but if the person
7
decides to use the assistance of a representative, the latter may be only a qualified representative.
Also, a participant in a proceeding is allowed to personally file a petition in a proceeding on petition.
Upon recourse to the Supreme Court a security is to be paid in the amount established in procedural laws. The security is not required in the proceedings of misdemeanour matters, criminal offence matters and constitutional review matters in the Supreme Court.
If an appeal in cassation, appeal against a ruling or a petition for the review of a court decision is
even partly allowed, the return of the security is decided on by ruling of a Chamber. If an appeal
or a petition is dismissed or refused the security is transferred into the public revenues. The court
may release an insolvent person, in part or in full, from payment of security at the request of the
person.
Acceptance for proceedings of administrative, civil, criminal or misdemeanour matters is decided by a panel of at least three members of a respective Chamber of the Supreme Court in a written proceeding without summoning the participants in the proceeding. The Chairmen of Chambers appoint one or several panels of three members for the term of at least three months who
shall decide on acceptance of matters for proceedings. A matter is accepted for proceedings if
the hearing thereof is demanded at least by one justice of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court shall accept a matter for proceedings if:
• the circuit court has evidently applied a provision of substantive law incorrectly in its judgment or has materially violated a provision of procedural law in making the judgment and this
could have resulted in an incorrect judgment;
• the adjudication of the appeal in cassation has fundamental importance with respect to
guaranteeing legal certainty and developing a uniform judicial practice or for the further development of a right.
The Supreme Court shall not accept an appeal in cassation or an appeal against a ruling or a petition for the review of a court decision if it is convinced that the appeal or petition is manifestly illfounded. In civil cases the Supreme Court does not need to accept an appeal in cassation if the
appellant in cassation contests the decision of the circuit court to an extent less than ten times
the minimum monthly wage established by the Government of the Republic*.
The Supreme Court shall hear, without selection, all petitions, appeals and protests filed pursuant
to the constitutional review procedure.
*
In December 2007 the Government of the Republic established the minimum monthly wage to be 4350 kroons.
8
2.1.2. Proceedings in the Supreme Court
After a matter has been accepted for proceedings the Chairman of Chamber shall appoint the
panel to adjudicate the matter, the presiding justice, the justice who shall report on the matter
and ensure the hearing of the matter and the preparation of the judgment, and – on the basis
of the proposal of the presending judge – the time of hearing . At the request of the Chairman
of Chamber the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court may, if need be, involve a justice of another
Chamber in the adjudication of the matter.
As a rule, matters are adjudicated in the Supreme Court in written proceedings. A court session
shall be held only at the request of a participant in the proceedings or if the court itself considers
it necessary. By way of exception all misdemeanour matters are adjudicated in oral proceedings.
Appeals against rulings are adjudicated in written proceedings irrespective of the requests of the
participants in the proceeding.
As a rule the Supreme Court shall review the judgments of circuit courts by way of cassation only
to the extent against which the appeal in cassation is filed; nevertheless, procedural law provides
for some exceptions in this respect.
On the basis of an appeal in cassation the Supreme Court shall verify whether the circuit court
has observed the provisions of court procedure and applied the law correctly. The judgment of
the Supreme Court is based primarily on the facts established by the judgment of the lower instance court. As a rule only dispute on the points of law takes place in the Supreme Court and
the Supreme Court does not collect or evaluate evidence or ascertain the facts serving as the basis of the appeal. The only exceptions are review proceedings and the establishment of violations
of provisions of procedural law by the circuit court.
If the judges of the panel hearing a matter have fundamentally dissenting opinions in the application of law or when it proves necessary to amend the most recent opinion of the Chamber on
application of law, the matter shall be referred to the full panel of the Chamber.
If the majority of the justices of the panel hearing a matter does not agree with the judgment
of another Chamber in the application of law, the matter shall be referred for review by a Special Panel composed of the members of the two Chambers who have dissenting opinions. Both
9
Chambers shall elect two members to the Special Panel and the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court shall preside it.
A matter shall be referred for review by the Supreme Court en banc, i.e. the full court, if it is considered necessary to adopt a different opinion in the application of law than expressed in the recent judgment of the Supreme Court en banc or when the adjudication of the matter by the
Supreme Court en banc is necessary for the uniform interpretation of the law. A matter shall be referred for review by the Supreme Court en banc also if adjudication of the matter presumes adjudication of a matter subject to review pursuant to the Constitutional Review Court Procedure Act.
2.1.3. Judgment of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court shall make a judgment within thirty days after the date of the last court session in which the matter was heard or, in the case of written proceedings, within thirty days after
the date of expiry of the term for submission of requests and documents. The term for making
public of a judgment may be extended for up to sixty days with good reason and, above all, due
to the large volume or particular complexity of the case.
A collegial court panel shall adjudicate the dissenting opinions matter by voting. A judge does
not have the right to abstain from voting or to remain undecided. Upon an equal division of votes,
the vote of the chair governs. A judge who maintains a minority position may present a dissenting opinion. The dissenting opinions annexed to the judgments of the Supreme Court shall be
published together with the judgments.
The Supreme Court has the right:
• to dismiss the appeal in cassation and refuse to amend the judgment or ruling of
a circuit court;
• to annul the judgment of a circuit court in full or in part and refer the annulled part to
the same or another circuit court for a new hearing;
• to annul the judgment or ruling of a circuit court and refuse to hear the appeal or protest,
or terminate the proceedings;
10
• to amend the judgment or ruling of a lower court or make a new judgment or ruling without referring the matter for a new hearing if there is no need to collect additional evidence in the matter or amend the analysis given to the evidence in the appeal proceedings;
• to annul the judgment of a circuit court and uphold the judgment or ruling of a court of first
instance.
The judgment or ruling of the Supreme Court enters into force on the date of pronouncement and is
not subject to further appeal. When the Supreme Court refuses to accept an appeal in cassation, the
appealed judgment enters into force on the date of pronouncement of the ruling on refusal to accept
the appeal in cassation for proceedings. The Supreme Court judgments and rulings are published
in the Supreme Court homepage www.riigikohus.ee and in Part III of the Riigi Teataja [State Gazette].
11
The Supreme Court en banc
2.2. Structure of the adjudication of justice
There are 19 justices in the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is in charge
of the work of the Supreme Court. Each justice of the Supreme Court (except the Chief Justice)
belongs to one of the three chambers: the Civil, Criminal or Administrative Law Chamber. In addition, the Supreme Court en banc elects eight members of the Constitutional Review Chamber
from among the justices of the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is an ex
officio ninth member of the Constitutional Review Chamber.
12
Accounting department
Constitutional
Review Chamber
Chief Justice,
8 elected justices,
and law clerks
Assets management
department
Court Office
Administrative
Law Chamber
5 justices,
and law clerks
Chief Justice
of the Supreme
Court
IT department
Judicial training
department
Criminal Chamber
6 justices,
and law clerks
Legal information
department
Personnel department
Civil Chamber
7 justices,
and law clerks
Public relations
department
Director
Executive
Assistant to
the Chief Justice
13
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Märt Rask
2.2.1. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is Märt Rask. He has been in charge of the Supreme Court
since 2004.
Märt Rask graduated from the University of Tartu Law Faculty in 1978. After graduation he worked
as an advocate for 12 years. After the restoration of independence Märk Rask has twice been the
Minister of Justice of Estonia and has been twice elected a member of the Riigikogu. He has actively participated in legislative drafting and has been one of the ideological fathers of the first legal reforms after restoration of independence. Märt Rask contributed to the drafting of the Constitution of the Republic of Estonia as a member of one of the working groups which drafted one
of the draft versions of the Constitution. He was the chairman of the working group on legalisation of the three-level court system, and he is one of the authors of the fundamental concept of
national defence and relevant legislation.
Pursuant to the Courts Act the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the Riigikogu on the proposal of the President of the Republic for nine years. No one shall be appointed as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for two consecutive terms.
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court directs the work of the highest court in Estonia, being at
the same time the ex officio Chairman of the Constitutional Review Chamber. In addition to the
duties of the head of the Supreme Court as a state agency, the Chief Justice is also responsible for
the activities and integral development of the court system as a whole. The role of the Chief Justice in the shaping of the uniform judicial practice and courts’ administration is explicitly manifested in the duty imposed on him by the Courts Act to present once a year, at the spring session
of the Riigikogu, a review to the Riigikogu concerning courts administration, administration of justice and the uniform application of law, pointing out the problems and difficulties needed to be
solved in co-operation between the legislator, the executive and the judicial powers.
14
2.2.2. Civil Chamber
There are 7 justices in the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court.
Since 2004 the Chairman of the Civil Chamber is Ants Kull. The Members of the Chamber are Henn Jõks, Lea Laarmaaa, Jaak Luik, Tambet Tampuu, Villu Kõve and Peeter Jerofejev. In the preparation and
hearing of matters the justices are assisted by law clerks and a secretary to the Chamber.
The Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court reviews judgments of circuit courts in civil matters on the basis of appeals in cassation and
appeals against rulings filed against the judgments and rulings of
the circuit courts. The Civil Chamber also adjudicates petitions for
the review of court decisions in force and in cases provided by law,
appoints a court with the appropriate competence to adjudicate the matter, and hears other
matters placed within its jurisdiction by law.
Ants Kull
Number of matters
Applications for proceedings in civil matters filed and matters adjudicated
1200
1000
800
a
600
400
b
200
0
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
a - applications | b - matters adjudicated
2.2.3. Administrative Law Chamber
There are 5 justices in the Administrative Law Chamber of the Supreme Court. Since 1993 the Chairman of the Chamber is Tõnu Anton. The members of the Chamber are Jüri Põld, Harri Salmann, Indrek Koolmeister and Julia Laffranque. In the preparation and
hearing of matters the justices are assisted by law clerks and a secretary to the Chamber.
The Administrative Law Chamber hears, on the basis of appeals in
cassation or appeals against rulings, the judgments of circuit courts
in administrative matters, it also hears petitions for review of court
decisions in administrative matters which have entered into force.
The administrative matters are first and foremost those disputes in
public law for the adjudication of which the law does not provide for a different procedure. The
Administrative Law Chamber hears matters pursuant to the procedure established in the Code
Tõnu Anton
15
of Administrative Court Procedure, and in matters not regulated by this Code the Chamber takes
guidance from provisions of civil procedure, taking into consideration the specifications of administrative court procedure.
Number of matters
Applications for proceedings in administrative matters filed and matters adjudicated
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
a
b
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
a - applications | b - matters adjudicated
2.2.4. Criminal Chamber
There are 6 justices in the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court.
Since 2003 the Chairman of the Criminal Chamber is Hannes Kiris.
The members of the Chamber are Lea Kivi, Eerik Kergandberg, Ott
Järvesaar, Jüri Ilvest and Priit Pikamäe. In the preparation and hearing of matters the justices are assisted by law clerks and a secretary
to the Chamber.
The Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court hears misdemeanour
matters and criminal offence matters on the basis of appeals in
cassation and appeals against rulings. The Criminal Chamber also
hears petitions for review of court decisions which have entered
into force.
Hannes Kiris
Applications for proceedings in criminal offence and misdemeanour
matters filed and matters adjudicated
Number of matters
1200
a
1000
800
600
400
b
200
0
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
a - applications | b - matters adjudicated
2005
2007
Assembly room of the Supreme Court en banc
16
17
2.2.5. Constitutional Review Chamber
The ex officio Chairman of the Constitutional Review Chamber is the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court Märt Rask.
There are 9 justices in the Constitutional Review Chamber. Each year, on the proposal by the
Chief Justice, the Supreme Court en banc appoints two new members of the Constitutional Review Chamber and releases two most senior members from the duties of member of the Chamber. The Supreme Court en banc takes into account the opinions of the Administrative Law, Criminal and Civil Chambers and tries to ensure that they are represented in the Constitutional Review
Chamber as equally as possible.
By way of constitutional review the Supreme Court verifies the conformity of legislation of general application or the refusal to issue an instrument of legislation of general application with the
Constitution, and the conformity of international agreements with the Constitution. In addition,
the Constitutional Review Chamber of the Supreme Court has several more specific functions.
For example, the Riigikogu may request from the Supreme Court an opinion on the interpretation of the Constitution in conjunction with the European Union law, if the interpretation of the
Constitution is of decisive importance in the passing of an Act necessary for the performance of
the obligations of a Member State of the European Union.
The President of the Republic, the Chancellor of Justice, a local government council, the Riigikogu
and the courts may submit requests for constitutional review to the Supreme Court.
The Constitutional Review Court Procedure Act does not provide for the possibility to address
the Supreme Court with individual constitutional complaints. Nevertheless, in its practice the Supreme Court has accepted the possibility of individual complaints in the cases when a person has
no other effective possibilities to exercise the constitutional right to the protection of the courts.
Number of matters reviewed by the Constitutional Review Chamber
of the Supreme Court
40
Number of matters
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
18
2.2.6. Supreme Court en banc
The Supreme Court en banc is the highest body of the Supreme Court, which is comprised of all
19 justices of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court en banc is convened and chaired by the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court en banc has a quorum if at least eleven
justices are present. The judgements of the Supreme Court en banc are adopted by the majority vote of the justices of the Supreme Court who are present, and if the votes are divided equally,
the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall cast the deciding vote.
The Supreme Court en banc shall:
• review decisions on the bases provided by law;
• make a proposal to the President of the Republic to appoint a judge to office or release
a judge from office;
• resolve appeals filed against the decisions of the judge’s examination committee and
the decisions of the Disciplinary Chamber;
• decide the commencement of disciplinary proceedings against the Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court, and notify the Riigikogu thereof;
• perform other duties arising from law and the internal rules of the Supreme Court.
19
2.3. The Supreme Court as the guarantor of the judges’ self-government
The duty of the Supreme Court as the highest court is to promote the uniform application of laws
through the review of court judgments. Besides administration of justice the Supreme Court has
the role of guaranteeing proper functioning of administration of justice in the court system, especially through organisation of work of judges self-government bodies.
The self-government bodies of judges play an important role in the development court system
through the decisions they take concerning the development of administration of justice and judicial system. The majority of the self-government bodies function within the Supreme Court,
the work of two such bodies – the Court en banc and Council for Administration of Courts ‑ is directed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
2.3.1. The Court en banc
The Court en banc is the largest judicial representative body, comprised of all Estonian judges.
The Court en banc shall be convened every year in early February; the extraordinary Court en banc
may be convened by the Minister of Justice or the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The Court
en banc shall be chaired by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court unless the Court en banc decides to elect another judge to chair.
The Court en banc discusses the problems of administration of justice as well as other issues concerning courts and the work of judges. It hears reports by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
and the Minister of Justice concerning the development of the legal and court system, elects
members of judicial self-government bodies and representatives to the examination committees,
professional suitability assessment committees and disciplinary committees of other legal professions.
The Court en banc in Tallinn in 2008
20
2.3.2. Council for Administration of Courts
Pursuant to the Courts Act the administration of courts must ensure the possibility for independent administration of justice, the working conditions necessary for administration of justice in
the court system, adequate training of court officers and the accessibility of administration of justice in the state. Courts of the first instance and courts of appeal are administered in co-operation
between the Council for Administration of Courts and the Ministry of Justice.
The Council for Administration of Courts is an advisory body convened for the management of
the court system. The most important decisions concerning the court system and relating to
administration of courts are first discussed and approved by the Council for Administration of
Courts.
The Council for Administration of Courts is comprised of the Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court, five judges elected by the Court en banc for three years, two members of the Riigikogu, representatives of the Bar Association and the Prosecutor’s
Office, and the Chancellor of Justice or a representative appointed by him or her.
The Minister of Justice or a representative appointed by him or her shall participate in the Council with the right to speak. The Council shall be chaired by the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
The Council for Administration of Courts shall:
• provide a preliminary opinion on the principles of the formation and amendment of annual budgets of courts, prepared by the Minister of Justice;
• provide an opinion on the candidates for a vacant position of a justice of the Supreme Court;
• deliberate, in advance, the review to be presented to the Riigikogu by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court concerning courts administration, administration of justice and the uniform application of law.
21
Most important decisions of the Minister of Justice which can be taken only on the approval of
the Council for Administration of Courts are following:
• determination of the number of judges in the first and second instance courts
• determination of the territorial jurisdiction, structure and exact location of courts
• the appointment to office and premature release of chairmen of first and second instance courts.
Also, the Council for Administration of Courts grants it approval for the determination of the internal rules of a court by the full court, and discusses other issues at the initiative of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or the Minister of Justice.
2.3.3. Disciplinary Chamber
For the adjudication of disciplinary matters of judges the Supreme Court comprises the Disciplinary Chamber.
A disciplinary offence is a wrongful act of a judge which consists of failure to perform or inappropriate performance of official duties, and also an indecent act of a judge.
Disciplinary proceedings shall be commenced if the referred elements of a disciplinary offence
become evident. The Courts Act gives the right to commence disciplinary proceedings to the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court against all judges; to the chairman of a circuit court against
judges of county courts and administrative courts in his territorial jurisdiction, and to the chairman of a court against the judges of the same court. If it is evident that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has committed a disciplinary offence, the Supreme Court en banc can initiate proceedings for the evaluation of his activities.
The Disciplinary Chamber hears a disciplinary matter at a court session.
If the judge has not committed a disciplinary offence, the Disciplinary Chamber shall make a decision by which the judge is acquitted of the disciplinary charge. If, on the other hand, the culpability of a judge is proved, the Disciplinary Chamber shall make a decision by which the judge is
convicted of the commission of a disciplinary offence and a disciplinary punishment is imposed
on the judge. Upon imposition of disciplinary punishment, the Disciplinary Chamber takes into
account the nature, gravity and consequences of the disciplinary offence, also the personal characteristics of the judge and other circumstances related to the offence.
The Disciplinary Chamber may remove a judge from service during the hearing of a disciplinary
matter, and reduce the judge’s salary for such period by not more than a half.
The Disciplinary Chamber is composed of five justices of the Supreme Court, five
circuit court judges and five judges of courts of the first instance.
Disciplinary punishments are: a reprimand, a fine in an amount of up to one
month’s salary, a reduction in salary and removal from office.
22
Year
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2006 2007 2008
Total
of disciplinary
decisions
4
3
3
4
7
3
3
1
3
Disciplinary
proceedings resulting in conviction
2
3
2
3
5
3
2
1
3
2.3.4. The judge’s examination committee
The main duty of the judge’s examination committee is the assessment of legal knowledge and
suitability of personal characteristics of persons applying for the judicial office and for the position of candidates for judicial office.
The committee presents the results of the competition to the Supreme Court en banc who shall
make the final selection and decide on making a proposal to the President of the Republic to appoint a judge to office. The final selection from among the persons who apply for the position of
a candidate for judicial office is made by the judge’s examination committee, who shall make a
proposal to chairman of court to appoint a person as candidate for judicial office.
Other duties of the judge’s examination committee include monitoring of the preparatory service and assessessing the results of the preparatory service of the candidate for judicial office. The
committee makes various decisions pertaining to the organisation of the preparatory service. The
committee gives its opinion to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court on the suitability for office
of a judge who was appointed to office up to three years ago, and performs other functions arising from law
23
The judge’s examination committee shall have ten members and be formed for five
years. The committee shall be comprised of two judges of the court of first instance
elected by the Court en banc, two circuit court judges, two justices of the Supreme
Court, one jurist designated by the council of the Law Faculty of the University of
Tartu, and representatives of the Ministry of Justice, the Bar Association and the
Prosecutor’s Office.
2.3.5. The Judicial Training Council
The Training Council is responsible for the functioning and development of training of judges –
the Council approves the strategies for training judges and the annual training programs and the
program for judge’s examination.
The Supreme Court who provides support services to the Training Council ascertains the training
needs of judges, prepares the strategies for training, annual training programs and the program
for judge’s examination. Also, the Supreme Court analyses training results, ensures the preparation of necessary study and methodological materials, assists in the preparation and selection of
training providers, and prepares an annual review concerning the training of judges for the Training Council.
The Training Council is comprised of two judges of a court of the first instance, two
judges of a court of appeal, two justices of the Supreme Court, and representatives
of the Prosecutor’s Office, the Minister of Justice and the University of Tartu.
24
The total number of Supreme Court personnel (justices and court officials) is over 100. The 19 justices of the Supreme Court are assisted in the preparation and hearing of cases by 30 law clerks.
In addition to the Chambers engaged in the administration of justice the Supreme Court comprises 8 departments providing services under the management of the Director of the Supreme
Court.
The Director of the Supreme Court is Kerdi Raud. The director directs and co-ordinates the work
of the structural units which provide support services to administration of justice, and is responsible for the preparation and execution of the budget. It is the duty of the Director to create and
guarantee prerequisites and conditions for the efficient and independent functioning of administration of justice.
The Accounting department keeps the Supreme Court accounts.
The Assets management department administers the assets in the possession of the Supreme
Court and organises the security service.
The Supreme Court Office is responsible for the organisation of the operations procedure of
the court, the circulation and public disclosure of documents, as well as proper archival processing thereof.
The Information Technology department maintains and develops the electronic data-bases
and hardware and soft ware of the Supreme Court.
The Judicial training department organises the judicial training and provides support services
to the Training Council. The judicial training department ascertains the training needs of judges,
prepares the strategies for training, training programs and organises the implementation thereof.
Director of the Supreme Court Kerdi Raud
2.4. The Supreme Court administration
25
Accounting department
Constitutional
Review Chamber
Assets management
department
Court Office
Administrative
Law Chamber
Chief Justice
of the Supreme
Court
IT department
Judicial training
department
Criminal Chamber
Legal information
department
Personnel department
Civil Chamber
Public relations
department
Director
Executive
Assistant to
the Chief Justice
26
The Legal information department facilitates the unification of judicial practice and ensures
the accessibility of relevant legal information. The Legal information department systematises
and analyses court rulings and judgments and statistics, and co-ordinates the rendering of opinions on draft legislation. Within the limits of its competence the department responds to the letters of and organises the reception of persons, proofreads the rulings and judgments of the Supreme Court and translates these.
The Personnel department shapes the personnel policy of the Supreme Court, organises the
personnel records management and registration. The Personnel department has the duty to provide support services to the judge’s examination committee and the Disciplinary Chamber, and
to keep the records concerning the service of Estonian judges.
The Public relations department manages the Supreme Court relations with the general public
and co-ordinates the public relations activities of the Supreme Court and the court system. The
department is responsible for the development and implementation of the information policy
of the Supreme Court and manages the internal communication of the Supreme Court and the
court system.
The Executive Assistant to the Chief Justice has the duty to provide advice to the Chief Justice
in guaranteeing the comprehensive development of the court system and courts’ administration,
and to perform and distribute the functions assigned by the Chief Justice in the management of
the court. The assistant to the Chief Justice is also responsible for the foreign relations of the Supreme Court through organising communication with the courts of other countries and international judicial organisations.
27
2.5. Foreign relations of the Supreme Court
As of 2008 the Supreme Court is the member of the following international organisations:
COUNCIL OF EUROPE
EUROOPA LIIT
• Conference of European
Constitutional Courts, uniting the
constitutional courts and higher
courts with similar jurisdiction
of the Council of Europe Member
States.
• Association of Councils of State
and Supreme Administrative
Jurisdictions of the European
Union; the Supreme Court is a member of the Association since
Estonia’s accession to the EU, that is from 1 May 2004.
• Consultative Council of European
Judges (CCJE), where the
Supreme Court is represented
since its first meeting on 8
November 2000. In 2008/2009
the President of the CCJE is Julia
Laffranque, justice of the Supreme
Court.
• The European Commission for
Democracy Through Law or the
Venice Commission was founded
in 1990 and it gives advice to the
Council of Europe member States
in the issues of constitutional law
and human rights.
• Network of the Presidents of
European Supreme Judicial Courts of the European Union; the Supreme Court is a member
of the network since it was
established in March 2004.
• EU Forum of Judges
for the Environment
Head of International Cooperation
Mari - Liis Lipstok
+372 730 9022
[email protected]
Meeting of CCJE working group in Tartu in 2008
28
3 H i s t o r y z
Jüri Jaakson
Jaak Reichmann
3.1. History of Estonia’s court system
3.1.1. Creation of court system 1918−1920
On 24 February 1918 the “Manifesto to all Peoples of Estonia” of the Board of Elders of the Estonian Diet, declaring Estonia’s sovereignty, was published. The Manifesto declared the principles
on which the democratic republic was to be built.
Section 1 of the Manifesto stated the following: “All citizens of the Republic of Estonia irrespective
of their religion, nationality and political views, shall enjoy equal protection before the laws and
the court of the Republic.” Section 4 of the Manifesto required that the Provisional Government “
[…] immediately set up courts for the protection of security of the citizens.”
On 18 November 1918 the Provisional Government issued a regulation entitled “Establishment of
provisional courts”, which was the first piece of legislation of the Estonian state concerning the
courts.
In November 1918 the Tallinn Circuit Court as a national court of appeal commenced its activities
in Tallinn. Pursuant to the order of the then Minister of Justice Jüri Jaakson all courts on the territory of the Republic of Estonia were to commence work on 2 December 1918.
1918 – 1920 Jüri Jaakson was the Minister of Justice of the Provisional Government and of the Government of the Republic.
On 13 November 1918, Jaak Reichmann, who was appointed the first Chairman of the Court of
Appeal, became the first judge of the sovereign Estonian state appointed to office by the Provisional Government.
29
3.1.2. Estonia’s courts 1920−1940
Thus, by 1920 the system of justice had been launched. The court system then had three instances, like today, but it had four links. The justices of the peace or the magistrates constituted first link
of the then court system. The appellation instances of the justices of the peace were the Commissions of the peace, later known as circuit courts. The third link was the national Court of Appeal –
the Kohtupalat, later the Kohtukoda. The Supreme Court formed the fourth link. A peculiarity of the
whole system was that all courts functioned as courts of first instance in regard to certain cases.
3.1.3. The end of the court system in 1940
The developments of the first half of 1940 brought about changes in the court system, too. In the
summer of 1940 the power to appoint and release judges was taken from the President of the Republic and vested in the Council of People’s Commissars. The new government actively started to
release from office and arrest judges.
On 16 November 1940 the Presidium of the Provisional Supreme Council of the Estonian SSR
passed a decree on reorganisation of the judicial system.
In 1940 and 1941 the judges of lower instance courts were relocated, some were released from office forever. The magistrates and circuit courts were maintained. The Supreme Court of the Estonian
SSR was formed on the basis of the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court of Estonia ceased to exist.
the s u pre m e co u rt
the co u rt o f appeal
circ u it co u rts
Investgating magistrates
district co u rts
30
3.1.4. Re-establishment of court system 1990−1993
On 16 May 1990 the Supreme Council of the Republic of Estonia adopted the Principles of Temporary Procedure of Estonian Government Act, putting an end to the subjection of the Supreme
Court of Estonia to the Supreme Court of the USSR. The administration of justice on Estonian territory was separated from the judicial power of the USSR and given into the sole competence of
Estonian courts.
Late in the evening of 20 August 1991 the Supreme Council of the Republic of Estonia passed a
resolution “on the independence of the Estonian State and on the formation of the Constitutional Assembly”, by which the independent Republic of Estonia was restored.
A few months later, in October, the Supreme Council of the Republic of Estonia passed the Republic of Estonia Courts Act and the Status of Judges Act. The referred Acts were passed to resolve the issues related to the judicial office and functioning of the court system. These Acts were
the foundation for the creation of a three-level court system. The next important step was taken
in the spring of 1992, when the Supreme Council passed a resolution on the judicial reform. According to the resolution the Supreme Court was to be re-established.
On 28 June 1992 the Constitution was adopted by a referendum.
The main organisational task of that time was to find people to perform the judicial tasks. For example, in 1993 there were 120 vacant judicial offices, the filling of which proved easier than expected.
3.1.5. Estonia’s courts 1993−2008
Pursuant to the Constitution Estonia has a three-level court system, comprising the county courts
and administrative courts, the circuit courts and the Supreme Court.
On 19 June 2002 a new Courts Act was passed, which entered into force on 29 July 2002. A very
important change introduced by the Act was the establishment of the Council for Administration
of Courts. The aim of establishing the Council was to involve the judges of all court instances in
making the decisions concerning the whole judicial system, as up to then it was only the Ministry
of Justice who had governed the first and second court instances. The creation of the Council for
Administration of Courts was an important step in the formation of an integral and independent
court system, as referred to in the Constitution.
On 1 May 2004 Estonia acceded to the European Union. Estonian courts became the courts of
the European Union and Estonian judges became European judges who, in their daily work, resort also to the European legislation, alongside the Estonian law.
Since 2006 the issues of integrity and independence of the court system have been discussed
with increasing intensity. On 1 December 2006 the first meeting for the discussion of development principles of the judicial system was held, and on 9 February 2007 the Estonian Court en
banc adopted the principles of development of the judicial system, which envisage the merger
of all three court instances into a single independent and self-administering whole.
31
3.2. History of the Supreme Court
The creation of a sovereign state also implied taking responsibility for the administration of justice on the highest level.
On 21 October 1919 the Constituent Assembly passed the Supreme Court Act, which – in conjunction with the Constitution of 1920 – laid a strong legal foundation for the highest court at the
top of the judicial system of the Estonian state.
The first court session of the Supreme Court was held in the assembly hall of the Tartu Town Hall
on 14 January 1920. Why in Tartu? The Supreme Court was removed to Tartu with the hope of
guaranteeing greater independence form the other branches of the state power, better contact
with the legal scholars of the University of Tartu, better possibilities of making use of the University library and greater accessibility for the population.
The Constituent assembly elected the first members of the Supreme Court in October 1919. A
member of the Constituent Assembly Kaarel Parts was elected the Chief Justice of the court, Paul
Beniko, Rein Koemets, Jaan Lõo, Hugo Reiman, Martin Taevere and Peeter Puusepp were elected
members of the court. The Supreme Court of that time comprised 11 members. The Constituent
Assembly declared Tartu as the seat of the Supreme Court. The first public session of the Supreme
Court took place on 14 January 1920 in the assembly hall of Tartu Town Hall.
Pursuant to law the Supreme Court was first and foremost a court of cassation. There were three
departments in the court, the highest body was the court en banc. Cassation proceedings were
allowed in all civil and criminal matters, restrictions were minimum.
The Civil Department of the Supreme Court heard appeals in cassation against the judgments
of National Court of Appeal (Kohtupalat) and appeals against judgments of Justice of the Peace
Courts (rahukogud) as the courts of second instance.
The Criminal Department was competent to hear appeals and protests in cassation against the
judgments of National Court of Appeal and Justice of the Peace Courts in criminal matters. The
department was also the highest military court.
The Administrative Department of the Supreme Court was the highest administrative court. The
Supreme Court was the first and the last court instance which reviewed complaints against the
decisions, orders and failures to act of ministries and other higher administrative agencies. It was
also possible to submit appeals for revision of and protests against the judgments of Justice of
the Peace Courts and justices of the peace in administrative matters.
The following were within the competence of the Supreme Court en banc:
• administration of the lower courts;
• appointment to and release from office of judges;
• unification of judicial practice.
In the interest of guaranteeing uniform interpretation of law the Supreme Court en banc and the
Departments could give binding interpretations of laws. These were published for general information in the Riigi Teataja (The State Gazette) and in law journal Õigus (The Law).
32
The Supreme Court comprised a State Prosecutor’s Office, headed by a prosecutor of the
Supreme Court.
The 1939 Amendment of the Constitution Act and the Constitution of 1938 placed the appointment to and release from office of judges within the competence of the Head of State.
By the decree of the Prime Minister of 1934 the Supreme Court was transferred from Tartu to
Tallinn. In 1935 the Supreme Court started its work in Wismari Street, Tallinn.
In 1940 the Soviet Union annexed the Republic of Estonia and this resulted in the liquidation of
the Supreme Court.
On 29 December 1940 a directive on the termination of the activities of the Supreme Court was
issued. Two days later the Supreme Court held its last session.
It is known that in 1940 justices Peeter Kann, Paul Välbe and Aleksander Hellat were arrested.
Kaarel Parts died of an illness on 5 December 1940. In 1940, when the Supreme Court was liquidated, 52 years remained until the appointment of the new Chief Justice and 53 years until the re-opening of the Supreme Court in Tartu.
The first building
of the Supreme Court
in Vanemuise Street, Tartu,
in 1920-1935
The building
of the Supreme
Court in Wismari
Street, Tallinn,
in 1935-1940
33
The foundations for the restoration of the activities of the Supreme Court were laid by the
Constitution of the Republic of Estonia, adopted by a referendum on 28 June 1992. The Constitution vested with the Supreme Court the functions of a court of cassation and of a court of constitutional review. Tartu became the seat of the Supreme Court once again.
The first public session of the newly re-established Supreme Court took place on 27 May 1993, in
the assembly hall of Tartu Town Hall. The President of the Republic Lennart Meri and the former
secretary of the Administrative Department of the Supreme Court Robert Tasso participated as
guests of honour.
In 1992–1998 the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was Rait Maruste, in 1998–2004 Uno Lõhmus.
34
4 I n f o r m a t i o n z
The rulings and judgments of the Supreme
Court are published on the Internet homepage of the court at www.riigikohus.ee; the
page has a search engine of judgments and
rulings.
The constitutional judgments of the Constitutional Review Chamber and of the Supreme Court en banc are also available in
English; please refer to the English version
of the Supreme Court homepage.
the s u pre m e
co u rt o f esto n ia
17 Lossi St
50093 Tartu
ESTONIA
Tel. +372 730 9002
Fax +372 730 9003
Photos: Malev Toom, Supreme Court of Estonia | Layout: Janno Preesalu / Ecoprint | 2009
Printed on FSC certified paper with inks
based on natural resins and oils. ©Ecoprint