|
Written by Willeke
|
|
Friday, 28 November 2008 00:00 |
|
 Verdict 1st Courtcase: Smartshops (VLOS) vs the State of the Netherlands.Facility judge Court of law The Hague rejects Mushroom claims.
We will go into appeal at a higher court !
Contents indication: Magic mushroom injunction. The claims of the National Smartshop Association (VLOS) and co are directed against the State as Legislator in the main issue. With her claims, she wants to render inoperative a general committing regulation. For establishing the claimed facilities or another facility with the same effect, it is necessary that the measure is in contradiction with the higher legislation or general principles of the law.
There is only room for interference by means of a temporary facility if the counteracted measure is unmistakably non-binding. This distantness is cohere to the given that the judge does not have as task to determine or weigh the interests that play on this terrain. This task is pre-eminently restricted to the legislator. The domain of the judge limits itself to the – as referred to, a limited – testing of the lawfulness of the counteracted measure. With that, the judge in interlocutory proceedings at least fits a reserved position. The facility judge comes to the conclusion that, within the limited framework of this interlocutory proceeding, it cannot be concluded with the demanded level of plausibility that carelessness towards de Vlos and co comes up. Neither did the by de Vlos and co advanced contradiction with the Opium Act or the First Protocol become sufficiently plausible. This leads to the conclusion that the order in council is not unmistakably non-binding and that the claims need to be rejected.
Read our translated 10 page claim, explaination and verdict here:
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
