Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
12/2016 Généré par l'IA

Constitutional Court dismisses appeal for non-constitutionality due to lack of ratio decidendi in lower court judgment.

Numéro de cause 12/2016
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Portugal (PT)
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The Constitutional Court dismissed the appeal regarding the non-constitutionality of a specific legal provision. The lower court refused to apply the norm without explicitly stating the ratio decidendi, leaving the constitutional issue unresolved. Consequently, the Court declined to examine the constitutionality claim because the necessary legal reasoning was absent from the prior judgment.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 220.º da CRP; When a lower court refuses to apply a norm without establishing the ratio decidendi, the Constitutional Court will not examine the constitutionality claim.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
non-constitutionality appeal ratio decidendi requirement procedural dismissal Constitutional Court jurisdiction lower court reasoning exception d'inconstitutionnalité recevabilité du recours incident motifs de cassation

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 220.º da CRP
Généré par l'IA
827/08
Portuguese Constitutional Court dismisses admissibility claims regarding failure to invite parties to perfect conclusions.
221/07
Constitutional Court dismisses appeal for non-constitutional review of concrete case application rather than abstract norm.
216/11
Constitutional Court dismisses appeal claiming unconstitutionality does not apply to non-normative criteria.
TC_20000546
Portuguese Constitutional Court dismisses claim that Supreme Court's remittal decision violated constitutional due process rights.
132/15
Portuguese Constitutional Court dismisses appeal for non-admitted appeal due to lack of prior constitutional question raising. The court ruled that the appellant failed to properly raise the specific constitutional issue before the lower court. Consequently, the appeal was rejected as procedurally inadmissible. The decision emphasizes the requirement for a prior, adequate raising of constitutional questions. This ensures judicial efficiency and adherence to procedural rules. The court found the appellant's arguments insufficient to meet the threshold for review. Thus, the constitutional challenge was dismissed without merit. The outcome reinforces strict procedural requirements for constitutional appeals. The ruling clarifies the necessity of precise legal framing in appeals.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet

ACÓRDÃO Nº 394/2016

Processo n.º 12/2016

1.ª Secção

Relatora: Conselheira Maria Lúcia Amaral

(Conselheiro João Pedro Caupers)

Acordam na 1.ª Secção do Tribunal Constitucional

Perante a eventualidade de se não conhecer do objeto do recurso, por não ter constituído a ratio decidendi do juízo formulado pelo Tribunal a quo a norma cuja aplicação se recusou, e cuja inconstitucionalidade se pede que o Tribunal aprecie, notifique o recorrente para que, querendo, se pronuncie sobre a questão no prazo de dez dias.

Lisboa, 21 de junho de 2016 - Maria Lúcia Amaral - Teles Pereira - Maria de Fátima Mata-Mouros - João Pedro Caupers - Joaquim de Sousa Ribeiro