Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
1 BvR 2846/19 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2020:rk20201105.1bvr284619 Generato dall'IA

Constitutional complaint on parallel proceedings; denial of admission under § 93d BVerfGG

Numero d'incarto 1 BvR 2846/19
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Inammissibile (Inadmissible)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Constitutional Court declined to hear the constitutional complaint, effectively upholding the lower court’s decision and denying the petitioner relief. The case involved a constitutional challenge to a judgment of parallel proceedings, with the petitioner likely contesting a criminal or administrative matter subject to concurrent litigation. The court found that the legal reasoning previously established by the same chamber in an earlier decision regarding a related case rendered the complaint unfounded, relying on the doctrine of parallel decisions to avoid redundant analysis; consequently, no further substantive reasoning was provided under § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG, and the decision was declared final and unappealable.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG; Constitutional complaint on parallel proceedings; denial of admission under § 93d BVerfGG: The case involved a constitutional challenge to a judgment of parallel proceedings, with the petitioner likely contesting a criminal or administrative matter subject to concurrent litigation. The court found that the legal reasoning previously established by the same chamber in an earlier decision regarding a related case rendered the complaint unfounded, relying on the doctrine of parallel decisions to avoid redundant analysis; consequently, no further substantive reasoning was provided under § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG, and the decision was declared final and unappealable.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
procedure connesse motivazione inadeguata delle censure costituzionali impugnazione di decisioni amministrative denuncia penale dottrina giuridica motivazione nel merito

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA

Giurisprudenza citata

Generato dall'IA
Generato dall'IA

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG

Procedural basis cited in the dispositive for waiving further reasoning in the non-acceptance 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: Parallelentscheidung

[TENOR]

Die Verfassungsbeschwerde wird nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen.

[GRUENDE]

Dem Erfolg der Verfassungsbeschwerde stehen die Erwägungen entgegen, welche die Kammer in dem Beschluss vom 11. August 2020 zu dem Aktenzeichen 1 BvR 2654/17 dargelegt hat und auf die verwiesen wird.

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

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.