NewsWhore
03-26-2010, 06:00 PM
The Santiago Fourth Chamber of the Penal Chamber of the Court of First Instance, with judge Cecilia Badia presiding, has ruled that parking meters contractor Blue Parking Company cannot charge for the service or penalize non-payers.
The ruling establishes that the contract between the Municipal Council and Blue Parking is null and void because it violates the Constitution. The judges say that the company may not charge fines because taxes and charges on public assets may only be imposed by Congress. The judge added that only the courts could impose fines and not Blue Parking, according to Article 69 of the Constitution. The sentence also accepted as good and valid the appeal filed by Jose Alfredo Calderon. Calderon filed the suit when Blue Parking first immobilized and then confiscated his car.
Judge Badia ordered Blue Parking Caribbean, or any other public or private institution to return the vehicle to Calderon. The sentence also ordered the company to pay a penalty of RD$1,000 for each day it delays in complying with the sentence. Judge Badia ruled for the immediate return of the vehicle, regardless of whether the company appeals.
More... (http://www.dr1.com/index.html#6)
The ruling establishes that the contract between the Municipal Council and Blue Parking is null and void because it violates the Constitution. The judges say that the company may not charge fines because taxes and charges on public assets may only be imposed by Congress. The judge added that only the courts could impose fines and not Blue Parking, according to Article 69 of the Constitution. The sentence also accepted as good and valid the appeal filed by Jose Alfredo Calderon. Calderon filed the suit when Blue Parking first immobilized and then confiscated his car.
Judge Badia ordered Blue Parking Caribbean, or any other public or private institution to return the vehicle to Calderon. The sentence also ordered the company to pay a penalty of RD$1,000 for each day it delays in complying with the sentence. Judge Badia ruled for the immediate return of the vehicle, regardless of whether the company appeals.
More... (http://www.dr1.com/index.html#6)