Paper short abstract:

The paper envisages examining decisions over the meaning and use of territory; questioning the existing gaps within axiological references of court decisions. Contradicting heritage and economy arguments invites to consider other possible paths legal argumentation might take.

Paper long abstract:

Quest for economic development time and again is taking spatial expressions. It is a permanent process of perception and valuation of space that further manifests in visions and plans, arguments and decisions over the space inhabited, used and also left untouched. Among other forms it takes, a genre of its expression is land use plan, reflecting values and understanding of the potential and meaning of a territory. All these aspects contribute to the semantics of a particular space that can be based on a certain consensus, but it can also raise a set of differences and contradictions in arguments and positions.

The paper envisages examining a particular case of deciding over a meaning of a territory, and over its values and potential, within the perspective of the quest for development. The case has been brought to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia, and deals with an issue of the land use in a particular territory Kundziņsala in Riga that traditionally has been inhabited by a fishermen community, and recently proposed as a potentially valuable territory for industrial prosperity and economical profits, contradicting the value and meaning the territory has for the community.

This leads to questioning the existing gaps within axiological references of court decisions; with a perspective on the possible paths that legal argumentation might take, considering cultural values of heritage as being interconnected to the potential of developing economy.