Chipre / Casos nacionales
President of the Republic v House of Representatives, Reference No. 5/2024
Casos nacionales. La inclusión en esta ficha no convierte una referencia extranjera en una decisión nacional. Se conserva el estado y el alcance de la fuente.
Expediente y fuentes
- Nombre
- President of the Republic v House of Representatives, Reference No. 5/2024
- Cita
- President of the Republic v House of Representatives, Reference No. 5/2024
- Tribunal
- Supreme Constitutional Court of Cyprus
- Instancia
- última instancia
- Fechas
- reference
- 2024
- opinion
- 2025-04-09
- Decisión
- 2025-04-09
- Estado
- resuelto-firmeza-no-verificada
- Resultado
- Entire referred law declared unconstitutional; opinion transmitted to the President and House.
- Resumen
- The first amendment violated article 23 because it collapsed exclusive-right charges and statutory remuneration, displaced the right holder's preventive control, and imposed an unsubstantiated restriction. The second violated article 26 because it forced right holders and CMOs into collection and distribution relationships with a third CMO they had not chosen. The whole referred law was unconstitutional under articles 23, 26 and consequently 179.1.
- Antecedentes
- Parliament amended article 26 of Law 65(I)/2017 on collective management. The first amendment let a disputing user choose what it considered reasonable and lodge only half the balance pending resolution. The second let a user make one annual or agreed lump-sum payment to one CMO for each licensed right, effectively making a user-selected CMO collector and distributor for other CMOs.
- Historia procesal
- The President referred the enacted amending law before promulgation under Constitution article 140. The court compared both provisions with constitutional property, contractual-freedom and supremacy guarantees and with the EU collective-rights framework.
- Cuestión jurídica
- Whether the two amendments unlawfully impaired IP property under Constitution article 23 and freedom of contract under article 26.
- Criterio
- The first amendment violated article 23 because it collapsed exclusive-right charges and statutory remuneration, displaced the right holder's preventive control, and imposed an unsubstantiated restriction. The second violated article 26 because it forced right holders and CMOs into collection and distribution relationships with a third CMO they had not chosen. The whole referred law was unconstitutional under articles 23, 26 and consequently 179.1.
- Fundamento decisivo
- Copyright, remuneration rights and related rights are distinct in content; collective management does not erase the right holder's underlying exclusive or contractual position. Restrictions require a demonstrated necessity and proportionality. A user cannot unilaterally reallocate collection relationships absent a constitutional basis.
- Límites
- No GenAI output, prompt, authorship or originality issue was before the court. Its relevance is the mandatory separation of authorial and neighbouring/economic rights.
- Relevancia
- doctrina-general
- Referencias relacionadas
- Peso del precedente
- binding constitutional opinion of the highest constitutional court Integración/votación: A.R. Liatsos P.; T.Th. Oikonomou, T. Psara-Miltiadou, D. Sokratous, N.G. Santis, St. Hadjigianni, T. Karakanna, I. Georgiou and M. Kalligerou JJ.; opinion delivered by Oikonomou J. unanimous nine-member court
- Fuente
- Referencia
- President of the Republic v House of Representatives, Reference No. 5/2024
- Enlace
- Consultar fuente
- Autoridad
- Supreme Constitutional Court of Cyprus
- Tipo
- binding national constitutional opinion distinguishing copyright from related rights
- Localizador
- sections headed Η πρώτη τροποποίηση, Η δεύτερη τροποποίηση and Η κατάληξη; source-text lines 258-268, 279-440, 464-497
- Verificación documentada
- Sí