Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
1 BvR 1608/18 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2019:rk20190326.1bvr160818 Generato dall'IA

Recusal request against judges not assigned to the deciding chamber is moot; non-acceptance of constitutional complaint without further reasoning

Numero d'incarto 1 BvR 1608/18
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Inammissibile (Inadmissible)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Constitutional Court declined to accept the constitutional complaint for decision, rendering the ruling final and unappealable without further justification. The applicant had challenged a lower court decision and filed a recusal request against specific judges, but the application lacked legal merit regarding the court's composition. The Court held that the recusal request required no further examination because the judges targeted were not members of the chamber competent to decide the complaint, citing established case law on jurisdictional requirements. Additionally, the Court exercised its discretion under Section 93d(1) Sentence 3 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act to forgo a detailed substantive explanation, thereby leaving the challenged non-acceptance of the primary complaint intact.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG; Recusal request against judges not assigned to the deciding chamber is moot; non-acceptance of constitutional complaint without further reasoning: Das gegen die Richter Voßkuhle und Maidowski sowie die Richterin Kessal-Wulf gerichtete Ablehnungsgesuch bedarf keiner Entscheidung, da diese nicht Mitglieder der zur Entscheidung über die Verfassungsbeschwerde berufenen Kammer sind (vgl. BVerfGE 131, 239 ; 133, 377 ).

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
requisito costituzionale censura di violazione costituzionale istanza di ricusazione tardiva fondatezza materiale diritto alla risoluzione del contratto obbligo di porre delle domande

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA

Giurisprudenza citata

Generato dall'IA
BVerfGE 131, 239
BVerfGE 131, 239 ; 133, 377 ).
Generato dall'IA

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

Nichtannahme einer Verfassungsbeschwerde ohne weitere Begründung - Ablehnungsgesuch gegen Richter, die der zur Entscheidung berufenen Kammer nicht angehören, bedarf keiner Entscheidung

[TENOR]

Die Verfassungsbeschwerde wird nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen.

[GRUENDE]

Das gegen die Richter Voßkuhle und Maidowski sowie die Richterin Kessal-Wulf gerichtete Ablehnungsgesuch bedarf keiner Entscheidung, da diese nicht Mitglieder der zur Entscheidung über die Verfassungsbeschwerde berufenen Kammer sind (vgl. BVerfGE 131, 239 ; 133, 377 ).

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

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.