Admissibility of constitutional complaint challenging civil court application of substantive law without demonstrating specific unconstitutionality

The Constitutional Court dismissed the constitutional complaint as inadmissible, thereby upholding the lower court’s decision and resulting in the loss of the case for the complainant. The dispute arose from a civil court ruling which the complainant challenged on the grounds that the provisions applied by the lower court were unconstitutional, specifically alleging a violation of fundamental rights through the interpretation or application of the relevant substantive law. The decisive legal basis for the Court’s dismissal was the procedural requirement under the Constitutional Court Act that a constitutional complaint must assert a specific unconstitutionality of a statute that directly influenced the outcome of the proceedings; the Court found that the complainant failed to sufficiently demonstrate that the lower court’s application of the law violated constitutional guarantees in a manner distinct from mere disagreement with the factual or legal findings of the instance courts.