Abstract
On 24 June 2010, the Austrian Constitutional Court rendered its most recent decision in a series on bilingual topographical signs in the Austrian province of Carinthia in V 9/10-9. The Court held that the difference in size between the German and Slovenian topographical signs for Bleiburg-Pliburg, Drveša vas- Ebersdorf and Žvabek were illegal and unconstitutional. Recall that the Austrian Constitutional Court had already held, on 13 December 2006, that the difference in size between bilingual topographical signs in German and in Slovenian in those places was illegal and unconstitutional and that this had to be resolved. However, this decision was put aside and bilingual topographical signs of different sizes remained in place.
Full PaperJernej Letnar Černič
Senior Research Associate
Jernej Letnar Černič is Associate Professor of Human Rights Law at the Graduate School of Government and European Studies (Ljubljana and Kranj, Slovenia)
Summary
On 24 June 2010, the Austrian Constitutional Court rendered its most recent decision in a series on bilingual topographical signs in the Austrian province of Carinthia in V 9/10-9. The Court held that the difference in size between the German and Slovenian topographical signs for Bleiburg-Pliburg, Drveša vas- Ebersdorf and Žvabek were illegal and unconstitutional. Recall that the Austrian Constitutional Court had already held, on 13 December 2006, that the difference in size between bilingual topographical signs in German and in Slovenian in those places was illegal and unconstitutional and that this had to be resolved. However, this decision was put aside and bilingual topographical signs of different sizes remained in place.
