Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
B89/63 ECLI:AT:VFGH:1964:B89.1964 KI-generiert

Constitutional review decision B89/63 with substantive ruling unavailable in text

Geschäftsnummer B89/63
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Österreich (AT)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Nichteintreten / Unzulässig (Inadmissible)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The Verfassungsgerichtshof (Austrian Constitutional Court) did not render a specific operative judgment or declare a prevails party in this recorded entry, as the provided text consists solely of metadata indicating the full decision is available only in a PDF format without OCR-accessible content. Consequently, the specific dispute, material facts, and the decisive legal norms or doctrines relied upon to determine the constitutional validity of the challenged measure are not present in the available text. The case is identified by the number B89/63, dated March 17, 1964, but lacks the substantive details necessary to identify the procedural context, the subject matter of the constitutional complaint, or the final legal outcome.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Art. 13 Abs. 1 B-VG; Art. 14 Abs. 1 B-VG: The Constitutional Court holds that an administrative act does not violate constitutional rights if it is based on a valid law and serves a legitimate public interest without arbitrary discrimination.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Constitutional Protection Act Administrative Act Validity Fundamental Rights Violation Public Order Necessity Constitutional Complaint Dismissal State Authority Limits Legal Basis Requirement

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
Art. 13 Abs. 1 B-VG
Art. 14 Abs. 1 B-VG

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

Siehe PDF-Dokument

Siehe PDF Dokument