(Petitions Concerning Uniform Interpretation)
After exhaustion of all ordinary judicial remedies, any person who believes that, in respect of the same legal provision in a statute or a regulation, a conflict exists between the interpretation rendered by a final court decision that finds against her or him and a prior one rendered by another court of last resort in a different adjudication system may lodge a petition with the Constitutional Court for a judgment of uniform interpretation on the relevant legal provision.
The person may not lodge a petition under the preceding Paragraph if the final court decision that renders the conflicting interpretation in finding against him is still subject to challenge through proceedings as provided for by the law or the relevant prior court decision has been overturned.
Petitions under the First Paragraph must be lodged within the peremptory period of three months after the service of the relevant final decision.

(Contents of Pleadings Concerning Uniform Interpretation)
Petitions under the preceding Paragraph shall be submitted in writing and include the particulars below:
(1) the name, the identification document number, and the domicile or the residence of the petitioner, and the correspondent address to which service shall be made; in the case that the petitioner is a legal person or an unincorporated association, its name and location;
(2) the name, the identification document number, and the domicile or the residence of the statutory agent, the representative or the administrator, where applicable;
(3) the name, the occupation, and the domicile or the residence of the advocate, where applicable;
(4) claims;
(5) interpretations in conflict and the relevant legal provision;
(6) the grounds for the petition and the petitioner's submission;
(7) the evidence which proves the observance of the peremptory period; and
(8) the titles of the annexes and the number thereof.

(Explanatory Notes from Relevant Courts of Last Resort)
When deciding cases arising under this Section, the Constitutional Court may request the relevant courts of last resort in different adjudication systems to submit explanatory notes as to their conflicting interpretations concerned.

(Vote Threshold for Admissibility in Uniform Interpretation)
The admissibility of petitions under this Section shall be decided by a majority of the Justices who have taken part in the proceedings with a quorum of a majority of the total number of the incumbent Justices of the Constitutional Court taking part in the proceedings. Failing the required majority, the petition shall be dismissed by an order.

(Remedies)
If the Constitutional Court renders a judgment that differs from the underlying final court decision in the interpretation of the relevant legal provision, the petitioner may seek judicial remedies through proceedings as provided for by the law or in accordance with the ratio decidendi of the judgment of the Constitutional Court. Where the underlying final court decision is on a criminal case, the Attorney General shall, on her or his own motion, file an extraordinary appeal in respect of such decisions.

(Effect of Uniform Interpretation Judgments)
The ratio decidendi of a judgment of the Constitutional Court on the uniform interpretation of statutes and regulations has res judicata effect on all courts which apply the same statutes and regulations.
The judgment as provided for by the preceding Paragraph shall not affect the legal effect of court decisions that have become final.