Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
2 BvR 923/24 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2024:rk20240712.2bvr092324 Generato dall'IA

Failure to substantiate alleged fundamental rights violation rendering constitutional complaint inadmissible under BVerfGG § 23(1) and § 92

Numero d'incarto 2 BvR 923/24
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Inammissibile (Inadmissible)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Constitutional Court’s Second Senate, Second Chamber, dismissed the applicant’s request for interim relief and declared the underlying constitutional complaint obviously inadmissible, resulting in a loss for the applicant. The dispute concerned a constitutional complaint where the applicants failed to demonstrate a violation of fundamental rights in accordance with the statutory requirements for justiciability. The court held that because the filing did not meet the substantive reasoning standards mandated by § 23(1) sentence 2 and § 92 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), no assessment of the balance of consequences was necessary, rendering the complaint inadmissible at the present time without further reasons.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG; Failure to substantiate alleged fundamental rights violation rendering constitutional complaint inadmissible under BVerfGG § 23(1) and § 92: The dispute concerned a constitutional complaint where the applicants failed to demonstrate a violation of fundamental rights in accordance with the statutory requirements for justiciability. The court held that because the filing did not meet the substantive reasoning standards mandated by § 23(1) sentence 2 and § 92 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), no assessment of the balance of consequences was necessary, rendering the complaint inadmissible at the present time without further reasons.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
motivazione inadeguata delle censure costituzionali diritti fondamentali carenza dei requisiti materiali diritto legale costituzionalità delle leggi procedimento sommario

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG
Cited in the dispositive to justify the omission of a further detailed legal justification for the decision.
Generato dall'IA
1 BvR 963/16
Constitutional complaint rejected for failure to substantiate fundamental rights violation
2 BvR 847/19
Constitutional complaint inadmissible for insufficient substantiation and failure to submit lower court decision
2 BvR 738/24
Inadmissibility of constitutional complaint for failure to engage with established fundamental rights standards
2 BvR 347/11
Inadmissibility of constitutional complaint for lack of substantiated fundamental rights argumentation and imposition of abuse fee on counsel
2 BvR 1948/20
Inadmissibility of constitutional complaint for failure to substantiate specific fundamental rights violation against ordinary law application

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 23 Absatz 1 Satz 2 Halbsatz 1, § 92 des Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetzes

Cited in the dispositive as the legal basis for declaring the constitutional complaint obviously inadmissible due to insufficient reasoning of alleged fundamental rights violations.

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG

Cited in the dispositive to justify the omission of a further detailed legal justification for the decision.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Erfolgloser Eilantrag im Verfassungsbeschwerdeverfahren bei derzeitiger offensichtlicher Unzulässigkeit der Verfassungsbeschwerde

[TENOR]

Der Antrag auf Erlass einer einstweiligen Anordnung wird abgelehnt. Die Verfassungsbeschwerde erweist sich im gegenwärtigen Zeitpunkt als offensichtlich unzulässig. Für eine Folgenabwägung bleibt daher kein Raum.

[GRUENDE]

Der Antrag auf Erlass einer einstweiligen Anordnung wird abgelehnt, weil die Verfassungsbeschwerde sich nach derzeitiger Aktenlage als offensichtlich unzulässig erweist. Denn der bisherige Vortrag der Antragstellerinnen genügt den Begründungsanforderungen gemäß § 23 Absatz 1 Satz 2 Halbsatz 1, § 92 des Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetzes nicht, da eine mögliche Verletzung von Grundrechten nicht hinreichend dargelegt wurde. Für eine Folgenabwägung bleibt daher kein Raum.

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

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.