Legislator Case Law & Legislation
1 BvR 1933/08 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2011:rk20111221.1bvr193308 AI generated

Constitutional complaint on waiving independent justification in parallel decisions under § 93d BVerfGG

Case Number 1 BvR 1933/08
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Germany (DE)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Federal Constitutional Court dismissed the constitutional complaint, rendering the decision final and unappealable. The case involved a challenge to a constitutional matter where the petitioner claimed applicability of a parallel decision. The Court based its ruling on the doctrine of parallel decisions (Parallelentscheidungen), referencing the reasons provided in a concurrent order from the same Chamber issued on December 8, 2011. Under § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG, the Court waived providing an independent substantive justification, relying instead on the cited precedent to resolve the dispute.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG; Constitutional complaint on waiving independent justification in parallel decisions under § 93d BVerfGG: The case involved a challenge to a constitutional matter where the petitioner claimed applicability of a parallel decision. The Court based its ruling on the doctrine of parallel decisions (Parallelentscheidungen), referencing the reasons provided in a concurrent order from the same Chamber issued on December 8, 2011. Under § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG, the Court waived providing an independent substantive justification, relying instead on the cited precedent to resolve the dispute.

Keywords

AI generated
substantive justification matter in dispute inadequate constitutional complaint justification of legal divergence unity of proceedings constitutional equality

Cited Legislation

AI generated

Cited Case Law

AI generated
AI generated

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG

Procedural rule permitting the court to waive a further independent legal justification by referencing a parallel decision.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Nichtannahmebeschluss: Parallelentscheidung

[GRUENDE]

Zur Begründung wird auf die im vorliegenden Verfahren ebenfalls Geltung beanspruchenden Ausführungen im Beschluss der 1. Kammer des Ersten Senats des Bundesverfassungsgerichts vom 8. Dezember 2011 im Verfahren 1 BvR 1932/08 (www.bverfg.de) verwiesen.

Von einer weiteren Begründung wird nach § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG abgesehen.

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.