The main aim of the project – to estimate the use of performance information in Telšiai region municipality administration. The use of performance information helps to improve performance management, to make more effective decisions, to enlarge the responsibility and clearness of public institutions. In the scientific analysis the importance of performance information institutionalization and performance measurement for the use of performance information has been revealed and the subjects which determine the use of performance information have been identified. It was analyzed for what purposes performance information in local government administration is used, the possibilities of the use of performance information have been presented and problematic fields of the use of performance information in Lithuania have been determined. During the qualitative research it was determined that the performance information in Telšiai region municipalities' administration is used for reporting to authority, evaluating and controlling the processes of the performance and for improving. Performance information is used for making decisions in performance planning and implementation as well as for making development plans. It was determined that a part of specialists of Telšiai region municipalities' administration in their reports are tend not to specify unreached results of the performance which influences the lack of completeness of submitted performance information. Publicity and dissemination of performance information is implemented continuously using different ways of public information that ensure the principle of clearness. It was determined that the use of performance information in Telšiai region municipalities' administration is influenced by legislation and law as well as individual features of public institution specialists, the quality of performance information, good practices of other municipality institutions and formal education.
The main aim of the project – to estimate the use of performance information in Telšiai region municipality administration. The use of performance information helps to improve performance management, to make more effective decisions, to enlarge the responsibility and clearness of public institutions. In the scientific analysis the importance of performance information institutionalization and performance measurement for the use of performance information has been revealed and the subjects which determine the use of performance information have been identified. It was analyzed for what purposes performance information in local government administration is used, the possibilities of the use of performance information have been presented and problematic fields of the use of performance information in Lithuania have been determined. During the qualitative research it was determined that the performance information in Telšiai region municipalities' administration is used for reporting to authority, evaluating and controlling the processes of the performance and for improving. Performance information is used for making decisions in performance planning and implementation as well as for making development plans. It was determined that a part of specialists of Telšiai region municipalities' administration in their reports are tend not to specify unreached results of the performance which influences the lack of completeness of submitted performance information. Publicity and dissemination of performance information is implemented continuously using different ways of public information that ensure the principle of clearness. It was determined that the use of performance information in Telšiai region municipalities' administration is influenced by legislation and law as well as individual features of public institution specialists, the quality of performance information, good practices of other municipality institutions and formal education.
The list of the enterprises which are bankrupt or facing bankruptcy is getting longer and longer. Guarantees assured to employees in the event of insolvency of the employer form one of the most urgent themes in Lithuania both for the corporate bankruptcy law institute and for the labour law institute. Insolvency of the employer produces the greatest negative impact on employees: the employer fails to settle payments with the employees or at times settlements are not executed at all. Law stipulates quite a few guarantees to employees. International standards and European Union directives provide protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer. There are two key institutions defending the interest of employees, i.e.: the court, with which the employee may lodge a claim on demands and guarantee funds, which would meet the minimum demands of employees targeted against insolvent employers. The ILO and EU requirements have been interpreted and implemented in myriad ways. Most developed countries use a hybrid system that gives workers' predetermined entitlements some priority in bankruptcy, but also provides unemployment insurance in acknowledgement that the remaining assets are often insufficient to cover outstanding entitlements. Lithuania has also accepted aforementioned Bankruptcy Priority - Guarantee Fund Approach model. However, at the beginning Guarantee Fund Law has some shortcomings why it does not act ant the Guarantee Fund was not possible at least at the minimum to satisfy legitimate demands of employees if their employer becomes insolvency. But after removal of these obstructions, after all the constant development of these legal acts, better regulation, invested funds, determined the progressing excessive budget of the Guarantee Fund, growth of payouts, and broader spectrum of payouts. This was the reason to cut the fees in half. All this leads to the point, that the Guarantee Fund is the effective and efficient Lithuanian institution for the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer. The assets of the Guarantee Fund will be especially needed next year, when the debt amounts to the employees of the companies under the bankruptcy procedure are expected to grow. This will be the area regulated by the state, which will not lack the funds.
The list of the enterprises which are bankrupt or facing bankruptcy is getting longer and longer. Guarantees assured to employees in the event of insolvency of the employer form one of the most urgent themes in Lithuania both for the corporate bankruptcy law institute and for the labour law institute. Insolvency of the employer produces the greatest negative impact on employees: the employer fails to settle payments with the employees or at times settlements are not executed at all. Law stipulates quite a few guarantees to employees. International standards and European Union directives provide protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer. There are two key institutions defending the interest of employees, i.e.: the court, with which the employee may lodge a claim on demands and guarantee funds, which would meet the minimum demands of employees targeted against insolvent employers. The ILO and EU requirements have been interpreted and implemented in myriad ways. Most developed countries use a hybrid system that gives workers' predetermined entitlements some priority in bankruptcy, but also provides unemployment insurance in acknowledgement that the remaining assets are often insufficient to cover outstanding entitlements. Lithuania has also accepted aforementioned Bankruptcy Priority - Guarantee Fund Approach model. However, at the beginning Guarantee Fund Law has some shortcomings why it does not act ant the Guarantee Fund was not possible at least at the minimum to satisfy legitimate demands of employees if their employer becomes insolvency. But after removal of these obstructions, after all the constant development of these legal acts, better regulation, invested funds, determined the progressing excessive budget of the Guarantee Fund, growth of payouts, and broader spectrum of payouts. This was the reason to cut the fees in half. All this leads to the point, that the Guarantee Fund is the effective and efficient Lithuanian institution for the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer. The assets of the Guarantee Fund will be especially needed next year, when the debt amounts to the employees of the companies under the bankruptcy procedure are expected to grow. This will be the area regulated by the state, which will not lack the funds.
The catalogue was prepared in the framework of the reseach project "Court Books of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL): digitization and database" realised by Vilnius University Library in 2011–2014 (VUL, Nr. LIT–5–19). The paper deals with the previously unexplored Trakai Castle Court Acts of 1660–1661 (F7–MDGs, 1660–1661) from the VUL collection. It presents Part III of the critical catalogue of the manuscripts written in Polish and Old Byelorussian (Ruthenian) languages, also as short descriptions of them (pp. 467–708). These documents are important for the research of Lithuanian, Polish and Byelorussian history. Information accumulated in them reflects a broad political, social and cultural panorama of the multilingual GDL society. It enables us to consider them as unique reference books that represent changing sociolinguistic situation of the GDL.
The catalogue was prepared in the framework of the reseach project "Court Books of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL): digitization and database" realised by Vilnius University Library in 2011–2014 (VUL, Nr. LIT–5–19). The paper deals with the previously unexplored Trakai Castle Court Acts of 1660–1661 (F7–MDGs, 1660–1661) from the VUL collection. It presents Part III of the critical catalogue of the manuscripts written in Polish and Old Byelorussian (Ruthenian) languages, also as short descriptions of them (pp. 467–708). These documents are important for the research of Lithuanian, Polish and Byelorussian history. Information accumulated in them reflects a broad political, social and cultural panorama of the multilingual GDL society. It enables us to consider them as unique reference books that represent changing sociolinguistic situation of the GDL.
The catalogue was prepared within the framework of the research project Court Books of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL): Digitization and Database, realized by Vilnius University Library in 2011–2014 (VUL, No. LIT–5–19). The paper deals with the previously unexplored Trakai Castle Court Acts of 1660–1661 (F7–MDGs, 1660–1661) from the VUL collection. It presents Part IV of the critical catalogue of the manuscripts written in Polish and Old Byelorussian (Ruthenian) languages, also as short descriptions of the documents No. 664–774 (pp. 709–826). These documents are important for the research of Lithuanian, Polish and Byelorussian history. Information accumulated within them reflects a broad political, social and cultural panorama of the multilingual GDL society. It enables us to consider them as unique reference books that represent the process of change in the sociolinguistic situation of the GDL
The catalogue was prepared within the framework of the research project Court Books of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL): Digitization and Database, realized by Vilnius University Library in 2011–2014 (VUL, No. LIT–5–19). The paper deals with the previously unexplored Trakai Castle Court Acts of 1660–1661 (F7–MDGs, 1660–1661) from the VUL collection. It presents Part IV of the critical catalogue of the manuscripts written in Polish and Old Byelorussian (Ruthenian) languages, also as short descriptions of the documents No. 664–774 (pp. 709–826). These documents are important for the research of Lithuanian, Polish and Byelorussian history. Information accumulated within them reflects a broad political, social and cultural panorama of the multilingual GDL society. It enables us to consider them as unique reference books that represent the process of change in the sociolinguistic situation of the GDL
The catalogue was prepared within the framework of the research project Court Books of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL): Digitization and Database, realized by Vilnius University Library in 2011–2014 (VUL, No. LIT–5–19). The paper deals with the previously unexplored Trakai Castle Court Acts of 1660–1661 (F7–MDGs, 1660–1661) from the VUL collection. It presents Part IV of the critical catalogue of the manuscripts written in Polish and Old Byelorussian (Ruthenian) languages, also as short descriptions of the documents No. 664–774 (pp. 709–826). These documents are important for the research of Lithuanian, Polish and Byelorussian history. Information accumulated within them reflects a broad political, social and cultural panorama of the multilingual GDL society. It enables us to consider them as unique reference books that represent the process of change in the sociolinguistic situation of the GDL
The catalogue was prepared within the framework of the research project Court Books of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL): Digitization and Database, realized by Vilnius University Library in 2011–2014 (VUL, No. LIT–5–19). The paper deals with the previously unexplored Trakai Castle Court Acts of 1660–1661 (F7–MDGs, 1660–1661) from the VUL collection. It presents Part IV of the critical catalogue of the manuscripts written in Polish and Old Byelorussian (Ruthenian) languages, also as short descriptions of the documents No. 664–774 (pp. 709–826). These documents are important for the research of Lithuanian, Polish and Byelorussian history. Information accumulated within them reflects a broad political, social and cultural panorama of the multilingual GDL society. It enables us to consider them as unique reference books that represent the process of change in the sociolinguistic situation of the GDL
The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the whether the termination of a referendum initiative is valid if based of an unofficial interpretation of the Constitution. The core questions, investigated in this thesis consists of whether the refusal to hold a referendum concerning a legal draft, which potentially does not meet the requirements arising from the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania constrain the citizens right to a referendum; can the Central Election Commission's and the Parliament's constitutional evaluation towards the citizens provided legal draft can be interpreted as some sort constitutional control. The arisen problem is examined in three parts of this thesis. The first parts presents background to this situation. On 2014 July 11'th the Constitutional Court of Lithuania adopted a resolution which the interpreted the additional powers to the Central Election Commission and the Parliament. This resolution established, that in order to prevent unconstitutional constitutional amendments to the Constitution, the Central Election Commission and the Parliament must be granted the jurisdiction to prevent such a referendum to take place, if it would be non-compliant with the fundamental provisions established in the Constitution or would lead to unconstitutional consequences. These powers themselves created an obligation, both to the Central Election Commission and the Parliament to check the contents of the submitted legal draft and to evaluate its compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania. Given the fact that a submitted legal draft is certain for constitutional checks not only in form, but also in terms of content, the question arises, what criteria should the Central Election Commission and the Parliament follow. For this reason, this part analyses what the fundamental constitutional values are enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania, and what kind of the safeguard mechanism is instilled. These criteria will provide a some sort of basis that could be determined in accordance with the legal draft. The second part deals with the situation where the Central Electoral Commission, within its jurisdiction, stated that a citizens' group submitted legal draft law does not comply with the requirements of the Constitution, thus shall not be put to vote in a referendum. For the same reason, the Parliament must refuse to hold a citizens' initiated referendum, even if such an initiative is at a request of 300 thousand citizens. Due to the fact that the requirement to call to provide 300 thousand signatures itself shows that the subject at hand is attributable to the major questions of the country. Parliament's refusal to hold such a referendum would not be an infringement of the sovereign powers held by the people. However, the question arises whether the refusal to call a referendum based on a legal draft, which potentially do not meet the requirements arising from the Constitution disproportionately restricts the right to call a referendum, which should by guaranteed by the Constitution. For this reason, this part will examine what are the real prospects to initiate and to call a referendum in Lithuania on behalf of the citizens, assessing how these perspectives have changed since the Constitutional Court adopted the mentioned resolution. This analysis will reveal possibility of a citizens' initiative and referendum, this analysis will determine whether the existing legal regulation does not create disproportionate difficulties in the implementation of the right to a referendum. The third part deals with the Lithuanian's Constitutional Court's exclusive right to interpret the concept of the Constitution; the analysis of the Central Electoral Commission's and the Parliament's content of powers and the constitutional practices of foreign countries. For this reason, this part will address the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania's prerogative to interpret the concept of the Constitution and why this exclusive right belongs to the Constitutional Court of Lithuania. This part will analyze whether the Central Electoral Commission and the Parliament right, to analyze the citizens provided legal draft in compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania implements functions consisting a degree of constitutional control as well as the implementation of such a practice should be seen in relation to the recommendations of the Venice Commission. This analysis will answer the question of whether the current legal regulation creates preconditions for citizens' groups to be rejected the referendum provided by a bill based on an unofficial interpretation of the Constitution. The analysis revealed that the only authority competent to assess the legal draft submitted for referendum, compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania is the Lithuanian Constitutional Court, since only the Constitutional Court has the exclusive right to interpretation of constitutional rules, which can cause legal consequences. Given the fact that the interpretation of the Constitution is the Constitutional Court exclusive right and that only the official interpretation of the Constitution should lead would lead to legal consequences, it must be concluded that the possible non-compliance of the Constitution setting, based on an unofficial interpretation is not sufficient enough to refuse to hold a referendum. The Central Election Commission has not been provided with an opportunity to apply to the Constitutional Court questioning the submitted legal draft; a legal draft law, according to the Legal Code of Administrative Cases, is not subject of interpretation by the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania, therefor it also not a subject of interpretation to the Constitutional Court. The Lithuanian Parliament adopted resolutions can possibly be subject of constitutional control, but that depends entirely on the will of the members of the Parliament. Evaluating these circumstances, it must be concluded that the Lithuania's current legal regulation of does not meet the recommendations of the Venice Commission. The absence of a clear possibility for a legal draft to be submitted for interpretation by the Constitutional Court, limits the right to an referendum initiative on behalf of the citizens of the Republic of Lithuania also preventing the referendum in accordance with unofficial interpretation of the Constitution. In accordance with these circumstances, it was found that both of the Parliament and the Central Election Commission's decision to refuse to register a referendum initiative or to hold a referendum on the basis, that the legal draft non-compliant with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania is considered an unofficial interpretation of the Constitution that cannot be a sufficient to restrict the citizens constitutional right to a referendum.
The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the whether the termination of a referendum initiative is valid if based of an unofficial interpretation of the Constitution. The core questions, investigated in this thesis consists of whether the refusal to hold a referendum concerning a legal draft, which potentially does not meet the requirements arising from the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania constrain the citizens right to a referendum; can the Central Election Commission's and the Parliament's constitutional evaluation towards the citizens provided legal draft can be interpreted as some sort constitutional control. The arisen problem is examined in three parts of this thesis. The first parts presents background to this situation. On 2014 July 11'th the Constitutional Court of Lithuania adopted a resolution which the interpreted the additional powers to the Central Election Commission and the Parliament. This resolution established, that in order to prevent unconstitutional constitutional amendments to the Constitution, the Central Election Commission and the Parliament must be granted the jurisdiction to prevent such a referendum to take place, if it would be non-compliant with the fundamental provisions established in the Constitution or would lead to unconstitutional consequences. These powers themselves created an obligation, both to the Central Election Commission and the Parliament to check the contents of the submitted legal draft and to evaluate its compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania. Given the fact that a submitted legal draft is certain for constitutional checks not only in form, but also in terms of content, the question arises, what criteria should the Central Election Commission and the Parliament follow. For this reason, this part analyses what the fundamental constitutional values are enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania, and what kind of the safeguard mechanism is instilled. These criteria will provide a some sort of basis that could be determined in accordance with the legal draft. The second part deals with the situation where the Central Electoral Commission, within its jurisdiction, stated that a citizens' group submitted legal draft law does not comply with the requirements of the Constitution, thus shall not be put to vote in a referendum. For the same reason, the Parliament must refuse to hold a citizens' initiated referendum, even if such an initiative is at a request of 300 thousand citizens. Due to the fact that the requirement to call to provide 300 thousand signatures itself shows that the subject at hand is attributable to the major questions of the country. Parliament's refusal to hold such a referendum would not be an infringement of the sovereign powers held by the people. However, the question arises whether the refusal to call a referendum based on a legal draft, which potentially do not meet the requirements arising from the Constitution disproportionately restricts the right to call a referendum, which should by guaranteed by the Constitution. For this reason, this part will examine what are the real prospects to initiate and to call a referendum in Lithuania on behalf of the citizens, assessing how these perspectives have changed since the Constitutional Court adopted the mentioned resolution. This analysis will reveal possibility of a citizens' initiative and referendum, this analysis will determine whether the existing legal regulation does not create disproportionate difficulties in the implementation of the right to a referendum. The third part deals with the Lithuanian's Constitutional Court's exclusive right to interpret the concept of the Constitution; the analysis of the Central Electoral Commission's and the Parliament's content of powers and the constitutional practices of foreign countries. For this reason, this part will address the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania's prerogative to interpret the concept of the Constitution and why this exclusive right belongs to the Constitutional Court of Lithuania. This part will analyze whether the Central Electoral Commission and the Parliament right, to analyze the citizens provided legal draft in compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania implements functions consisting a degree of constitutional control as well as the implementation of such a practice should be seen in relation to the recommendations of the Venice Commission. This analysis will answer the question of whether the current legal regulation creates preconditions for citizens' groups to be rejected the referendum provided by a bill based on an unofficial interpretation of the Constitution. The analysis revealed that the only authority competent to assess the legal draft submitted for referendum, compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania is the Lithuanian Constitutional Court, since only the Constitutional Court has the exclusive right to interpretation of constitutional rules, which can cause legal consequences. Given the fact that the interpretation of the Constitution is the Constitutional Court exclusive right and that only the official interpretation of the Constitution should lead would lead to legal consequences, it must be concluded that the possible non-compliance of the Constitution setting, based on an unofficial interpretation is not sufficient enough to refuse to hold a referendum. The Central Election Commission has not been provided with an opportunity to apply to the Constitutional Court questioning the submitted legal draft; a legal draft law, according to the Legal Code of Administrative Cases, is not subject of interpretation by the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania, therefor it also not a subject of interpretation to the Constitutional Court. The Lithuanian Parliament adopted resolutions can possibly be subject of constitutional control, but that depends entirely on the will of the members of the Parliament. Evaluating these circumstances, it must be concluded that the Lithuania's current legal regulation of does not meet the recommendations of the Venice Commission. The absence of a clear possibility for a legal draft to be submitted for interpretation by the Constitutional Court, limits the right to an referendum initiative on behalf of the citizens of the Republic of Lithuania also preventing the referendum in accordance with unofficial interpretation of the Constitution. In accordance with these circumstances, it was found that both of the Parliament and the Central Election Commission's decision to refuse to register a referendum initiative or to hold a referendum on the basis, that the legal draft non-compliant with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania is considered an unofficial interpretation of the Constitution that cannot be a sufficient to restrict the citizens constitutional right to a referendum.
The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the whether the termination of a referendum initiative is valid if based of an unofficial interpretation of the Constitution. The core questions, investigated in this thesis consists of whether the refusal to hold a referendum concerning a legal draft, which potentially does not meet the requirements arising from the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania constrain the citizens right to a referendum; can the Central Election Commission's and the Parliament's constitutional evaluation towards the citizens provided legal draft can be interpreted as some sort constitutional control. The arisen problem is examined in three parts of this thesis. The first parts presents background to this situation. On 2014 July 11'th the Constitutional Court of Lithuania adopted a resolution which the interpreted the additional powers to the Central Election Commission and the Parliament. This resolution established, that in order to prevent unconstitutional constitutional amendments to the Constitution, the Central Election Commission and the Parliament must be granted the jurisdiction to prevent such a referendum to take place, if it would be non-compliant with the fundamental provisions established in the Constitution or would lead to unconstitutional consequences. These powers themselves created an obligation, both to the Central Election Commission and the Parliament to check the contents of the submitted legal draft and to evaluate its compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania. Given the fact that a submitted legal draft is certain for constitutional checks not only in form, but also in terms of content, the question arises, what criteria should the Central Election Commission and the Parliament follow. For this reason, this part analyses what the fundamental constitutional values are enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania, and what kind of the safeguard mechanism is instilled. These criteria will provide a some sort of basis that could be determined in accordance with the legal draft. The second part deals with the situation where the Central Electoral Commission, within its jurisdiction, stated that a citizens' group submitted legal draft law does not comply with the requirements of the Constitution, thus shall not be put to vote in a referendum. For the same reason, the Parliament must refuse to hold a citizens' initiated referendum, even if such an initiative is at a request of 300 thousand citizens. Due to the fact that the requirement to call to provide 300 thousand signatures itself shows that the subject at hand is attributable to the major questions of the country. Parliament's refusal to hold such a referendum would not be an infringement of the sovereign powers held by the people. However, the question arises whether the refusal to call a referendum based on a legal draft, which potentially do not meet the requirements arising from the Constitution disproportionately restricts the right to call a referendum, which should by guaranteed by the Constitution. For this reason, this part will examine what are the real prospects to initiate and to call a referendum in Lithuania on behalf of the citizens, assessing how these perspectives have changed since the Constitutional Court adopted the mentioned resolution. This analysis will reveal possibility of a citizens' initiative and referendum, this analysis will determine whether the existing legal regulation does not create disproportionate difficulties in the implementation of the right to a referendum. The third part deals with the Lithuanian's Constitutional Court's exclusive right to interpret the concept of the Constitution; the analysis of the Central Electoral Commission's and the Parliament's content of powers and the constitutional practices of foreign countries. For this reason, this part will address the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania's prerogative to interpret the concept of the Constitution and why this exclusive right belongs to the Constitutional Court of Lithuania. This part will analyze whether the Central Electoral Commission and the Parliament right, to analyze the citizens provided legal draft in compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania implements functions consisting a degree of constitutional control as well as the implementation of such a practice should be seen in relation to the recommendations of the Venice Commission. This analysis will answer the question of whether the current legal regulation creates preconditions for citizens' groups to be rejected the referendum provided by a bill based on an unofficial interpretation of the Constitution. The analysis revealed that the only authority competent to assess the legal draft submitted for referendum, compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania is the Lithuanian Constitutional Court, since only the Constitutional Court has the exclusive right to interpretation of constitutional rules, which can cause legal consequences. Given the fact that the interpretation of the Constitution is the Constitutional Court exclusive right and that only the official interpretation of the Constitution should lead would lead to legal consequences, it must be concluded that the possible non-compliance of the Constitution setting, based on an unofficial interpretation is not sufficient enough to refuse to hold a referendum. The Central Election Commission has not been provided with an opportunity to apply to the Constitutional Court questioning the submitted legal draft; a legal draft law, according to the Legal Code of Administrative Cases, is not subject of interpretation by the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania, therefor it also not a subject of interpretation to the Constitutional Court. The Lithuanian Parliament adopted resolutions can possibly be subject of constitutional control, but that depends entirely on the will of the members of the Parliament. Evaluating these circumstances, it must be concluded that the Lithuania's current legal regulation of does not meet the recommendations of the Venice Commission. The absence of a clear possibility for a legal draft to be submitted for interpretation by the Constitutional Court, limits the right to an referendum initiative on behalf of the citizens of the Republic of Lithuania also preventing the referendum in accordance with unofficial interpretation of the Constitution. In accordance with these circumstances, it was found that both of the Parliament and the Central Election Commission's decision to refuse to register a referendum initiative or to hold a referendum on the basis, that the legal draft non-compliant with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania is considered an unofficial interpretation of the Constitution that cannot be a sufficient to restrict the citizens constitutional right to a referendum.
The Doctoral Dissertation "The Subjects with the Right to Refer for a Preliminary Ruling under the Law of the European Union" seeks to determine the suitable conception of a subject of preliminary ruling, to assess the requirements for subjectivity, and to provide recommendations on how and what selection criteria should be changed. The dissertation research analyzes the possibilities of various national institution groups to refer to the Court of Justice. The influence of absence of definition of a court under Article 267 of TFEU on cooperation of national courts with the Court of Justice is examined. It is explored, whether it prevents the national institutions from using the preliminary ruling procedure. Following the research data and analysis of subjectivity criteria, used in the case law of the Court of Justice, the drawbacks of conception of "member state's court" were identified and recommendations for definition of subject were given.
The Doctoral Dissertation "The Subjects with the Right to Refer for a Preliminary Ruling under the Law of the European Union" seeks to determine the suitable conception of a subject of preliminary ruling, to assess the requirements for subjectivity, and to provide recommendations on how and what selection criteria should be changed. The dissertation research analyzes the possibilities of various national institution groups to refer to the Court of Justice. The influence of absence of definition of a court under Article 267 of TFEU on cooperation of national courts with the Court of Justice is examined. It is explored, whether it prevents the national institutions from using the preliminary ruling procedure. Following the research data and analysis of subjectivity criteria, used in the case law of the Court of Justice, the drawbacks of conception of "member state's court" were identified and recommendations for definition of subject were given.
