Binding to subordinate authority's legal interpretation violates right to a legal judge

The Constitutional Court ruled that the respondent’s argument relying on its binding obligation to the lower administrative authority’s legal view violated the constitutional right to a proceeding before the legal judge. The case concerned a dispute over whether a municipal body was compelled by Art. 119a Abs. 5 B-VG to follow the legal interpretation of a subordinate authority in an appealed decision, thereby preventing it from issuing a proper substantive judgment. The Court determined that such a binding effect on the decision-maker’s substantive discretion or obligation to rule unlawfully restricts the right to a legal judge, as it forces the authority either to make an improper substantive decision or to unjustly refuse to rule, contrary to constitutional guarantees of independent judicial review.