home

Supreme Court v Covid Pass Case

Supreme Court v Covid Pass Case

Supreme Court v Covid Pass Case

Re: the Legality of Passports based on Covid tests to retain access to basic Human Rights

 

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: August, 2021
  • Location: Spain
  • Court: Supreme Court
  • Case #:
  • Plaintiff:
  • Defendant:
  • Trial Type:
  • Judge: Supreme Court
  • Status: Decided
  • Verdict: For the Plaintiff

Background

So far, only five of Spain’s 17 autonomous regions – the Canary Islands, Ceuta and Melilla, Andalusia, Cantabria and Galicia – have proposed using vaccine passports to restrict access to public spaces. And all have been rejected by local judges. [1]

Spain’s Supreme Court weighs in on its legality.

 

Significance

Spain’s Supreme Court become the first judicial authority in Europe to rule against the use of covid passports to restrict access to public spaces — specifically hospitality businesses, such as bars, restaurants and nightclubs. [1]

It’s the first time a high court of an EU Member State has challenged the use of vaccine passports domestically. However, it is not the first Spanish court to come out against vaccine passports, but it is the most important. [1]

 

Plaintiff’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…

 

Decision

Following a caussation appeal by the Junta de Andalucía to a previous decision of the High Court of that community (TSJA), the Supreme Court considers that the presentation of this certificate in drinking establishments is an intense and extensive restriction of individual rights that needs a “substantive justification”; that is, the High Court believes that to decree this measure, it has to be justified that public health is preserved, something that does not occur in the Andalusian case. [2]

The Supreme Court of Spain has overturned the obligation to present the covid passport to enter nightlife venues. The Supreme Court considers that the presentation of this certificate in the drinking establishments is an intense and extensive restriction of the individual rights that it needs of a “substantive justification”.

In other words, the High Court believes that to order this measure, it must be justified to preserve public health, something that does not happen in the Andalusian case.

“It is not a precisely essential measure to safeguard public health in a given space where a social condition of coexistence exists, but rather a preventive measure,” argues the court.

The Supreme Court considers that this restriction could not be decreed in a general way for the entire Andalusian territory and all municipalities without considering the cumulative incidence in each locality and without connection with the health situation or with the situation of the pandemic.

“Precisely because of their severity and because they affect the entire Andalusian population,” these limitations “restrictively affect basic elements of freedom of movement and the right of assembly,” says the sentence.

Aftermath

…More information is needed…

Further Research

Court Documents:
  • Read the Court Ruling
In the news:

  • …More information is needed…

 

Media

……

source: ….

….

source: ….

 

References

  1. Spain’s Supreme Court rules against vaccine passports restrictions
  2. El Supremo tumba el pasaporte covid para entrar en el ocio nocturno

 

Keyword

Andalucía, Bars, Covid, Freedom of Movement, Hospitality, Illegal, Nightclubs, Pass, Passport, Restaurants, Right of Assembly, Spain, Supreme Court

Back to All Cases

 

Retailers 2G Case

Retailers 2G Case

Retailers 2G Case

Re: the Legality of Germany’s 2G rules

 

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: December 16, 2021
  • Location: Lüneburg, Lower Saxony, Germany
  • Court: Lower Saxony High Administrative Court
  • Case #: Az.: 13 MN 477/21
  • Plaintiff: Retailers
  • Defendant: Government
  • Trial Type:
  • Judge:
  • Status: Decided
  • Verdict: For the Plaintiff

 

Background

The implementation of Covid restrictions in the retail sector, named the 2G rule, has been challenged in court by retailers from all over Germany.

Those without a Covid passport are now forbidden to enter many shops, restaurants, and cultural events as a result of the 2G law.

Retailers have complained about a substantial decline in sales and the terrible timing of the restrictions during the Christmas season since the 2G rule was enforced in the retail sector earlier this month.

 

Significance

This case highlights the impact of the covid rules on the economy, especially small businesses. It also questions the discriminatory nature of the guidelines.

 

Plaintiff’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Decision

The execution of the laws impacting retail was suspended by a court in Lower Saxony on Thursday. The restrictions were declared discriminatory by the court.

The measure was not necessary to further contain the corona virus and was also not compatible with the general principle of equality, the court ruled. [2]

One of the reasons given by the court for its decision was that it was not possible to simply transfer research findings from enclosed spaces in the sports and leisure sector to the retail sector. Moreover, customers could also be required to wear an FFP2 mask in the retail sector. In addition, he said, it was not apparent that the country had increased its research on infection pathways to improve the targeting of its protective measures. [2]

 

Aftermath

“The judgment in Lower Saxony makes it clear that the 2G regulation is not a legal sure-fire successor for large parts of the retail sector,” said HDE (German Trade Association) managing director Stefan Genth of the German press agency.

Genth expects that other federal states that have challenged the 2G rule will follow Lower Saxony’s lead.

“The other state governments should now also take this into account, avoid unjustified burdens on the retail trade and not wait until their ordinances are collected again by the courts,” he said in a statement.

 

Further Research

Court Documents:
  • Read the Court Ruling
In the news:

 

Media

2G-Regel für Kinder ab 12 Jahren

source: Bild

Gericht kippt 2G im Einzelhandel

source: Ritter der Meinungsfreiheit

Infektiologe kritisiert 2G-Regel

source: Bild

 

References

  1. German court state of Lower Saxony has ruled that vaccine passports are illegal
  2. Niedersachsen kippt 2G-Regel im Einzelhandel

 

Keyword

2G, Christmas, Genth, German, German Trade Association, Germany, HDE, High Administrative Court, Lower Saxony, Pass, Passport, Retailers

Back to All Cases

 

Wallonia Covid Pass Case

Wallonia Covid Pass Case

Wallonia Covid Pass Case

Re: the Legality of using passes to access public spaces– turning rights into privileges

 

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: Nov 12(?) 2021
  • Location: Wallonia, Belgium
  • Court: Namur city’s Court of First Instance
  • Case #:
  • Plaintiff: Notre bon droit
  • Defendant: City
  • Trial Type:
  • Judge:
  • Status: End
  • Verdict: For The Plaintiff

 

Background

A non-profit organization called ‘Notre bon droit’ (Our good right) initiated the procedure challenging the Wallonia region’s decree on the COVID pass. (1)

At the time of this case: Use of the COVID Safe Pass is mandatory all over the country when entering restaurants, gyms and cultural venues. But officially, regional governments are responsible for imposing the restrictive measures under the federal-state system. (1)

 

Significance

This case is a blow to the Covid Pass system which seeks to impose restrictions on rights- essentially turning rights into privileges.  The case upholds the fundamental rights of people to go about their daily lives. 

 

Plaintiff’s Argument

…More information needed…

 

Defendant’s Argument

  • According to the Belgian daily Le Soir, representatives of the Wallonia government failed to appear at a court hearing on Nov. 16 because no one dealt with the file in the public administration for five days due to a combination of a weekend and public holidays. (1)
  • The invitation letter was received on Nov. 10, but the day after was Armistice Day commemorating the end of World War I, a public holiday in Belgium. The holiday fell on a Thursday and was extended to a long weekend by most of the officials. (1)
  • The following Monday – Nov. 15. – was King’s Day, which grants a holiday for the public administration. (1)
  • As a consequence, nobody dealt with the file and the hearing took place in the absence of the Wallonia officials. (1)

 

Decision

  • The court ruled that use of a COVID pass is illegal and ordered the local government to pay a daily fine of €5,000 ($5,658) until they withdraw the measure, local media reported Wednesday. (1)
  • Namur city’s Court of First Instance ruled Tuesday that use of the COVID Safe Ticket (CST) was illegal in the Wallonia region.
  • According to the judgment, rules requiring everyone to show their CST before entering cafés, restaurants, gyms and cultural venues were curbing individual freedoms in a disproportionate way which does not serve the goal they pursue. (1)

 

Aftermath

The Wallonia region announced that they would not repeal the regulation and appealed immediately against the judgment. (1)

 

Further Research

…More information needed…

 

Media

…

source: ..

…

source: ….

…

source: …

 

References

  1. Belgian court rules COVID pass illegal in Wallonia

 

Keyword

Belgium, Covid, digital, certificate, green, Pass, Wallonia, Notre bon droit

Back to All Cases