Basic information			Substance of the ruling			Accessibility of the case and further relevant links
Date	Name of the case (or case number)	The body delivering the decision	Keywords, topic	Executive part	Brief summary	Full text	Page at the website of the issuing court	Page in other databases	Unofficial materials, press communications
October 31. 2022.	5-22-4	Supreme Court of Estonia	Freedom of movement; freedom of assembly; freedom to conduct a business; right to equality; right to education; right to work	The Supreme Court of Estonia held that the Covid-19 passport requirement during the public health emergency was constitutional, however, the legislature should provide more specific regulation from similar restrictions against any future epidemics.	The Administrative Court of Tartu heard joint challenges submitted by 55 individuals and 3 companies against two governmental orders based on the public health legislation to impose Covid-19 passport requirement for movement, entertainment, and other public activities. The Administrative Court requested clarifications from the Supreme Court whether the public health legislation at the background of the impugned measures were constitutional. The Supreme Court held that the Covid-19 passport requirement introduced a quasi vaccination mandate, however, this was necessary in the light of the extraordinary public health circumstances. Therefore, the constitutionality of the contested restrictions were upheld. However, the Supreme Court called the legislation to enact more specific regulations from similar public health restrictions in the case of any future outbreak.	https://www.riigikohus.ee/et/lahendid/?asjaNr=5-22-4/13			https://news.err.ee/1608772675/supreme-court-covid-passport-law-not-contrary-to-estonian-constitution
2022.10.01.		Supreme Court	Covid passport law not contrary to Estonian Constitution	Claim upheld	Norms put in place by a piece of legislation which enabled the government to introduce Covid passports during the pandemic were not in conflict with the Estonian Constitution, a Supreme Court ruling finds. However, the legislature should specify the norms set out by the legislation more clearly, against any future Covid outbreaks.	https://news.err.ee/1608772675/supreme-court-covid-passport-law-not-contrary-to-estonian-constitution
23 December 2021	No. 5-21--32.	Supreme Court of Estonia		Claim upheld	A generally applicable remote participation regime in the Parliament has been an unjustified restriction on the functioning of the Parliament, least restrictive means were also available in the current publich health situation.	https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2022/698879/EPRS_BRI(2022)698879_EN.pdf
May 20. 2021.	5-20-10	Supreme Court of Estonia	Freedom of movement; right to remedy	The Supreme Court of Estonia held that it has competence to conduct constitutional review over the act from the visa-free stay of third country nationals in Estonia, and that these persons should also benefit from right to remedy should they be extradited.	Two Ukrainian citizens arrived in Estonia and were employed there, however, they have been infected by the Covid-19 pandemic, consequently, they were quarantined. Despite this measure, they have fulfilled in person their job-related duties in the workplace, therefore, they were extradited from the country. The two Ukrainian nationals challenged this decision before the courts, and also the constitutionality of that provision which exclude the appeal of third country nationals against their extradition. Finally, the matter was brought before the Supreme Court, which held that it has competence to conduct constitutional review over the act on visa-free stay in Estonia; moreover, the provision excluding the appeals of third country nationals against their extradition was unconstitutional.			https://fra.europa.eu/sl/caselaw-reference/estonia-supreme-court-5-20-10