Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
1 BvR 748/06 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2011:rs20111207.1bvr074806 Generato dall'IA

Inadmissibility of judicial fee valuation for pre-litigation legal advice in constitutional complaint proceedings

Numero d'incarto 1 BvR 748/06
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 dismissed the petitioner's application for the determination of the subject matter value (Gegenstandswert) as inadmissible, thereby denying the requested fee allocation. The dispute arose from a constitutional complaint proceeding in which the unrepresented petitioner sought a court-fixed value citing pre-trial legal counsel for a pre-filing consultation. The Court held that the application was inadmissible because, under Section 33 Paragraph 1 of the Federal Lawyers' Fees Act (RVG), judicial determination of the subject matter value is exclusively available for lawyerly activity occurring within court proceedings, expressly excluding pre-trial or extra-judicial advisory work from such valuation.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 33 Abs. 1 RVG, § 33 RVG; Inadmissibility of judicial fee valuation for pre-litigation legal advice in constitutional complaint proceedings: The dispute arose from a constitutional complaint proceeding in which the unrepresented petitioner sought a court-fixed value citing pre-trial legal counsel for a pre-filing consultation. The Court held that the application was inadmissible because, under Section 33 Paragraph 1 of the Federal Lawyers' Fees Act (RVG), judicial determination of the subject matter value is exclusively available for lawyerly activity occurring within court proceedings, expressly excluding pre-trial or extra-judicial advisory work from such valuation.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
spese legali oggetto della lite procedura di stima motivazione inadeguata delle censure costituzionali materie escluse accertamento giudiziale di diritti

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 33 Abs. 1 RVG
The provision cited to determine that the application for fixing the subject matter value is inadmissible because it requires lawyerly activity within judicial proceedings, which is excluded in cases of pre-trial activity.
§ 33 RVG
Aufl. 2009, § 33 Rn. 4; Hartmann, Kostengesetze, 40. Aufl. 2010, § 33 RVG Rn. 3).
Generato dall'IA
1 BvR 461/17
Inadmissibility of application for subject-matter value fixation above statutory minimum following non-acceptance of constitutional complaint
2 BvR 2226/20
Constitutional complaint: Admissibility of judicial subject value determination and reimbursement of expenses following non-acceptance
2 BvR 883/14
Judicial review of fee valuation: Setting the subject matter value for constitutional complaint proceedings above statutory minimum based on objective significance under RVG §§ 14, 37
2 BvR 24/16
Valuation of subject matter for attorney’s fees after non-admission of a constitutional complaint
2 BvR 2552/08
Inadmissibility of motion to exceed minimum subject matter value for attorney fees in unadmitted constitutional complaint

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 33 Abs. 1 RVG

The provision cited to determine that the application for fixing the subject matter value is inadmissible because it requires lawyerly activity within judicial proceedings, which is excluded in cases of pre-trial activity.

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

Ablehnung der Gegenstandswertfestsetzung für ein Verfassungsbeschwerdeverfahren - Unzulässigkeit des Antrags bei lediglich vorgerichtlicher anwaltlicher Tätigkeit

[GRUENDE]

Der Antrag auf Festsetzung des Gegenstandswerts ist unzulässig.

1. Der im Verfassungsbeschwerdeverfahren nicht anwaltlich vertretene Beschwerdeführer begehrt unter Hinweis auf anwaltliche

Beratung im Vorfeld der Erhebung der Verfassungsbeschwerde vorsorglich die Festsetzung des Gegenstandswerts.

Voraussetzung für eine Wertfestsetzung nach § 33 Abs. 1 RVG ist eine anwaltliche Tätigkeit in einem gerichtlichen Verfahren.

Bei außergerichtlicher oder - wie hier - nur vorgerichtlicher Tätigkeit ist eine gerichtliche Wertfestsetzung ausgeschlossen

(vgl. Sommerfeldt/Jahn, in: Beck'scher Online-Kommentar RVG, § 33 Rn. 1 ; Kroiß, in: Mayer/Kroiß, Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz,

4. Aufl. 2009, § 33 Rn. 4; Hartmann, Kostengesetze, 40. Aufl. 2010, § 33 RVG Rn. 3).