Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
1 BvR 2494/09, 1 BvR 1257/10 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2010:rk20100914.1bvr249409 Generato dall'IA

Constitutional complaint: No credible indication of fundamental rights violation in lower court decision

Numero d'incarto 1 BvR 2494/09, 1 BvR 1257/10
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 (First Senate, Third Chamber) dismissed two constitutional complaints without accepting them for decision, upholding the lower courts' rulings and leaving the challenged decisions in force. The complainants, who challenged previous court judgments on the grounds that they violated their fundamental rights, failed to establish any credible indication of such a violation based on their submissions. The court held that the complaints lacked general constitutional significance and were not justified for the enforcement of fundamental rights, as there was no prospect of success. Relying on §§ 93a(2) and 93d(1) Sentence 3 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), the court denied acceptance of the cases and waived further reasoning, resulting in a final, unappealable decision against the complainants.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 93a Abs. 2 BVerfGG, § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG; Constitutional complaint: No credible indication of fundamental rights violation in lower court decision: The complainants, who challenged previous court judgments on the grounds that they violated their fundamental rights, failed to establish any credible indication of such a violation based on their submissions. The court held that the complaints lacked general constitutional significance and were not justified for the enforcement of fundamental rights, as there was no prospect of success. Relying on §§ 93a(2) and 93d(1) Sentence 3 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), the court denied acceptance of the cases and waived further reasoning, resulting in a final, unappealable decision against the complainants.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
diritti fondamentali motivazione inadeguata delle censure costituzionali esecuzione della sentenza motivi validi diritto acquisito uguaglianza giuridica costituzionale

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 93a Abs. 2 BVerfGG
Main ground for the decision, establishing that the constitutional complaints were not accepted for decision because the statutory conditions for acceptance were not met.
§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG
Procedural rule permitting the court to waive from further reasoning in the operative part of the decision.
Generato dall'IA
1 BvR 963/16
Constitutional complaint rejected for failure to substantiate fundamental rights violation
1 BvR 2837/16
Constitutional complaint rejected for lacking fundamental rights violation, centered on factual determination and burden of proof
1 BvR 80/13
Constitutional complaint dismissed for lack of verifiable fundamental rights violation due to factual and procedural law character of the claims
1 BvR 174/23
Constitutional complaint against state constitutional court rulings rejected for lack of legal aid eligibility and insufficient substantiation of fundamental rights violations
2 BvR 1098/11
Constitutional complaint over refusal of a substantive decision by a chamber of the Federal Constitutional Court

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 93a Abs. 2 BVerfGG

Main ground for the decision, establishing that the constitutional complaints were not accepted for decision because the statutory conditions for acceptance were not met.

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG

Procedural rule permitting the court to waive from further reasoning in the operative part of 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

Nichtannahmebeschluss: Keine Anhaltspunkte für Grundrechtsverletzung durch angegriffene Entscheidungen ersichtlich - Absehen von weiterer Entscheidungsbegründung

[GRUENDE]

Die Verfassungsbeschwerden sind nicht zur Entscheidung anzunehmen, weil die Voraussetzungen dafür nicht vorliegen (§ 93a Abs.

2 BVerfGG). Ihnen kommt keine grundsätzliche verfassungsrechtliche Bedeutung zu. Ihre Annahme ist auch nicht zur Durchsetzung

der Grundrechte oder grundrechtsgleichen Rechte der Beschwerdeführer angezeigt; denn sie hat keine Aussicht auf Erfolg. Anhaltspunkte

dafür, dass die angegriffenen Entscheidungen gegen die als verletzt gerügten verfassungsmäßigen Rechte der Beschwerdeführer

verstoßen, sind auf der Grundlage des Vorbringens der Verfassungsbeschwerden nicht ersichtlich.

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

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.