Petitioners "Law Without Compensation Rules, Property Rights Restricted"
Constitutional Court "Housing Restriction, Need for All Members of Society to Share Burden"
The Constitutional Court has ruled that the absence of regulations compensating for losses caused by COVID-19 gathering restrictions does not violate the Constitution.
On the 3rd, the Constitutional Court announced that it unanimously dismissed the constitutional complaint filed by petitioner A and others regarding Article 70, Paragraph 1 of the Infectious Disease Prevention and Control Act (Infectious Disease Prevention Act).
Article 70, Paragraph 1 of the Infectious Disease Prevention Act stipulates that if losses occur due to infectious diseases, compensation must be provided based on the review and resolution of the Loss Compensation Deliberation Committee. However, only medical institutions are explicitly listed as eligible for compensation, and there are no separate provisions compensating losses for general restaurants and the like.
Accordingly, the petitioners who operate restaurants argued that despite their property rights being restricted by the gathering restriction measures, the legislature's omission to include compensation provisions in the contested clause violates the Constitution, and thus filed a constitutional complaint.
The Constitutional Court held that although the petitioners’ general restaurant operations were restricted by the gathering restriction measures, resulting in decreased business profits, the petitioners were not restricted in their specific rights to use, benefit from, or dispose of their business facilities and equipment. Therefore, the absence of compensation provisions cannot be seen as limiting the petitioners’ property rights.
The Court stated, "Since the prolonged situation of gathering restrictions or bans due to the COVID-19 pandemic was unprecedented, it was difficult to foresee that significant business losses would occur from long-term gathering restrictions or bans," and added, "The legislature’s failure to establish compensation regulations for business losses caused by gathering restrictions or bans in advance cannot be immediately considered a violation of the right to equality."
Furthermore, the Court ruled, "Even if business sales decreased compared to before the COVID-19 outbreak, gathering restrictions are measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 for the entire community, so the burden should be shared by all members of society," and noted, "The decrease in sales is also partly due to people voluntarily refraining from visiting restaurants to avoid COVID-19 infection."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
