Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
1 BvR 902/23 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2023:rk20230523.1bvr090223 Generato dall'IA

Rejection of legal aid and non-acceptance of constitutional complaint for lack of sufficient prospect of success and omission of reasoning

Numero d'incarto 1 BvR 902/23
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 constitutional complaint without further reasoning and did not accept it for decision, thereby upholding the lower court's procedural rulings; the court also rejected the application for legal aid and the request for reinstatement of deadlines, rendering the motion for a preliminary injunction moot, while separately disposing of the recusal motion as obviously inadmissible. The case involved a challenge to judicial recusal and the rejection of legal aid in the context of a constitutional complaint, where the applicant’s arguments for bias were deemed wholly unsuitable to establish a reasonable suspicion of partiality, and the planned legal action lacked sufficient prospects of success. The decisive legal basis comprised § 93d para. 1 sentence 3 BVerfGG for the lack of a reasoned decision on the complaint, and established case law standards for dismissing recusal motions and denying legal aid when there is no sufficient chance of success.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG, § 40 Abs. 3 GOBVerfG; Rejection of legal aid and non-acceptance of constitutional complaint for lack of sufficient prospect of success and omission of reasoning: The case involved a challenge to judicial recusal and the rejection of legal aid in the context of a constitutional complaint, where the applicant’s arguments for bias were deemed wholly unsuitable to establish a reasonable suspicion of partiality, and the planned legal action lacked sufficient prospects of success. The decisive legal basis comprised § 93d para. 1 sentence 3 BVerfGG for the lack of a reasoned decision on the complaint, and established case law standards for dismissing recusal motions and denying legal aid when there is no sufficient chance of success.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
domanda di ricusazione procedura di gratuito patrocinio parzialità del giudice decisione pregiudiziale motivazione inadeguata delle censure costituzionali allegazione motivata

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG
Cited to justify the omission of further reasoning in the operative part of the decision regarding the dismissal of the constitutional complaint.
§ 40 Abs. 3 GOBVerfG
Cited in the dispositive to declare the application for a preliminary injunction moot as a consequence of the non-acceptance of the constitutional complaint.

Giurisprudenza citata

Generato dall'IA
BVerfGE 142, 1
BVerfGE 142, 1 ; 152, 53 ; 153, 72 ; stRspr).
BVerfGE 153, 72
BVerfGE 153, 72 ; stRspr).
Generato dall'IA
1 BvR 2009/21
Denial of legal aid for constitutional complaint where applicant failed to substantiate prospects of success or fundamental rights violation
1 BvR 2217/21
Rejection of legal aid and constitutional complaint for failure to substantiate prospects of success and fundamental rights violation
1 BvR 828/20
Non-admission of constitutional complaint and denial of legal aid for lack of prospects of success in challenging refusal of legal assistance
1 BvR 2152/20
Constitutional complaint dismissed for failure to exhaust ordinary legal remedies; legal aid denied due to lack of prospect of success.
1 BvR 684/22
Denial of legal aid and constitutional complaint for failure to demonstrate prospect of success in constitutional review

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 40 Abs. 3 GOBVerfG

Cited in the dispositive to declare the application for a preliminary injunction moot as a consequence of the non-acceptance of the constitutional complaint.

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG

Cited to justify the omission of further reasoning in the operative part of the decision regarding the dismissal of the constitutional complaint.

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 - Verwerfung eines offensichtlich unzulässigen Ablehnungsgesuchs

[TENOR]

Das Ablehnungsgesuch gegen den Präsidenten Harbarth, die Richterinnen Ott, Härtel, Kessal-Wulff und Wallrabenstein sowie den Richter Radtke wird als unzulässig verworfen.

Der Antrag auf Bewilligung von Prozesskostenhilfe und Beiordnung eines Rechtsanwalts wird abgelehnt.

Die Verfassungsbeschwerde wird, ohne dass über den Antrag auf Wiedereinsetzung in den vorigen Stand entschieden zu werden braucht, nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen.

Mit der Nichtannahme der Verfassungsbeschwerde wird der Antrag auf Erlass einer einstweiligen Anordnung gegenstandslos (§ 40 Abs. 3 GOBVerfG).

[GRUENDE]

1. Das Ablehnungsgesuch ist offensichtlich unzulässig, da das Vorbringen des Beschwerdeführers lediglich Ausführungen enthält, die zur Begründung der Besorgnis der Befangenheit gänzlich ungeeignet sind (vgl. BVerfGE 142, 1 ; 152, 53 ; 153, 72 ; stRspr). Bei offensichtlicher Unzulässigkeit bedarf es keiner dienstlichen Stellungnahme der abgelehnten Richterinnen und Richter; diese sind auch nicht von der Entscheidung über das offensichtlich unzulässige Ablehnungsgesuch ausgeschlossen (vgl. BVerfGE 153, 72 ; stRspr).

2. Der Antrag auf Bewilligung von Prozesskostenhilfe und Beiordnung eines Rechtsanwalts für die Verfassungsbeschwerde ist abzulehnen, weil die beabsichtigte Rechtsverfolgung keine hinreichende Aussicht auf Erfolg bietet.

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

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.