PART IV PART III PART II PART I CANCELLOR OF JUSTICE AS OMBUDSMAN FOR CHILDREN children attended a private kindergarten. On this basis, the Chancellor proposed to the city to rely on a valid Keila town regulation instead of applying conditions which are void, and to amend the contract between the town and the private kindergarten so that it does not contain any void conditions. In case of Saue rural municipality, the amount of the fee paid by the parents whose children attended Saue town municipal kindergarten arose from a legal act passed by Saue town. This regardless of the fact that even after the conclusion of the cooperation agreement Saue rural municipality still remained the guarantor of the service. Therefore the cooperation agreement did not relieve the rural municipality of the duty imposed by the law to establish the fee by its own legislation. Hence, the kindergarten fee of parents of Saue rural municipality had to be established on the basis of the relevant legal act passed by Saue rural municipality. It was found that already during the Chancellor’s proceedings the rural municipality took steps to ensure that the parents of children of Saue rural municipality who attend the kindergarten of Saue town do not have to pay a higher fee than they would pay in case of attending the kindergarten at Saue rural municipality. The Chancellor acknowledged the rural municipality for its pertinent and swift action. 2. Transport compensation to pupils in Rae rural municipality Case No 6-4/130715 On the basis of a petition, the Chancellor verified compliance of the right of free transport provided to pupils of the school of Rae rural municipality with the law and the Constitution. Not all the pupils of the school of Rae rural municipality had the right of free transport but only those whose both parents were registered, according to the population register, as inhabitants of Rae municipality at least three months before the date of submitting the application for the benefit. The Chancellor found that although the local authority is not obliged to provide a free public transport service, it may however voluntarily and from its own budget provide benefits under the Public Transport Act, including offering free transport. In case of a benefit the receipt of which does not depend on a family’s income and the payment of which is not required from the local authority under any Act, the local authority has more discretion in restricting the fundamental right to equality. This means that the local authority may establish conditions for the receipt of the benefit which are suitable and necessary for achieving the aim of paying the benefit but which may place a certain group of persons in a more favourable situation in comparison with the persons who are in a similar situation but do not meet the established conditions. In the petitioned matter, the Chancellor reached the opinion that the condition for the receipt of the transport benefit established by the regulation of Rae rural municipality does not violate the general fundamental right to equality. 46 3. Weekly load of pupils engaged in education for children with severe and profound intellectual disability Case No 6-2/120901 On the basis of a petition, the Chancellor verified the compatibility of the regulation of the weekly load of pupils engaged in education for children with severe and profound intellectual disability with the principle of equal treatment arising from the Constitution. The load of pupils studying according to the curriculum for such education is maximum 20 hours per week on the whole basic school level, while for other basic school pupils it is within the range of 20–32 hours per week depending on the grade.