the Constitution and place in the context of the legal system also inevitably affect the control exercised by the Constitutional Court. That is to say, the legislator’s freedom of action in regulating a specific matter may be broader or narrower, and the Constitutional Court has to determine whether the scope of the freedom of action exercised by the Saeima conforms to the provisions of the Constitution (cf. Subparagraphs 15.2 and 15.3 of the Constitutional Court Judgment in the Case No. 200604-01 passed on 8 November 2006). Thus, the compliance of the provisions impugned in this Case with the principle of protection of legitimate expectations and the principle of proportionality should be determined in the context of Article 109 of the Constitution. Concerning Article 91 of the Constitution, the Constitutional Court repeatedly stated that, when ascertaining whether any legal provision of the Law on State Pensions contradicts to the principle of equality, one has to take into account the legal area that the impugned provision falls into. The principle of equality usually applies along with other fundamental rights – especially because often one cannot adjudicate a case on the basis of this principle alone. The rights established in Article 91 of the Constitution are “relative”, namely, although they stipulate equal treatment, by themselves they do not reveal the nature of this treatment, i.e. whether it should be favourable or unfavourable. In order to arrive at one of these outcomes, one should take into account other considerations outside the limits of the principle of equality (cf., e.g., Paragraph 5 and Sub-paragraph 6.1 of the Constitutional Court Judgment in the Case No. 200508-01 passed on 11 November 2005 and Paragraph 15 of the Constitutional Court Judgment in the Case No. 2006-04-01 passed on 8 November 2006). Furthermore, the Constitutional Court stated that the rights to receive pension disbursements are deemed as property rights in the understanding of Article 105 of the Constitution. However, when determining the compliance of a legal provision to the article in question, one has to take into account whether the case is related to the area of social rights. If the case is related to this area, it should at the same time be taken into account that the rights and legal interests of the submitter of the Application cannot be protected to the same extent as they would be protected in the case of restriction of property rights in their “classic” understanding (cf. Paragraphs 20 and 28