Failure: Halabi, Ernesto c / PEN - Law 25,873 - dto. 1563-1504 s / 16,986 law under
SCJ [24-FEB-2009] The Supreme Court declared unconstitutional the "Spy Act" preventing the State listening to telephone or e-mail monitoring without a warrant. Protect privacy on the Internet and telephony and by creating a "class action", the statement that 25,873 law unconstitutional, it acquires a collective dimension applicable to all citizens.
extraordinary appeal by the National Government, represented by Dr. Mariana Tamara Saulquin. Transfer
answered by Dr. Ernesto Halabi (ex officio).
Court of Origin: National Chamber of Appeals in Federal Administrative Court II.
courts that intervened before: Federal Court of First Instance in Administrative Federal No. 10.
The most important decision point 13 ... :
13) That the source of this type actions required to verify a common factual cause, a procedural claim focused on the collective aspect of the effects of that fact and the finding that the individual exercise does not appear fully justified. Notwithstanding which also apply if, despite being of individual rights, there is a compelling state interest in protecting them, is of their social or under the particular characteristics of the sectors concerned.
The first element is the existence of a complex single event or cause injury to a significant plurality of individual rights.
The second element is that the claim must be concentrated on the effects of common and not what each individual may petition, as in cases where there are facts that harm two or more people and can motivate actions first category. Thus, the existence of cause or controversy, in such cases, not related to differential damage suffered in each subject area, but with the homogeneous elements having a multiplicity of subjects to be affected by the same event.
The third element is required that the individual interest in isolation, does not justify the promotion of a demand, which could be affected access to justice. Notwithstanding the foregoing, as anticipated, the action will result in anyway from those cases in which preeminence other aspects relating to matters such as the environment, consumption, health or affect groups that have traditionally been neglected or if weakly protected. In these circumstances, the nature of these rights beyond the interest of each party, and at the same time, reveals the presence of a compelling state interest to protect it, meaning the society as a whole. In this regard, Articles 41, 42 and 43, second paragraph, of the Constitution provide a pattern in the line exposed.
