Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
1 BvQ 14/15 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2015:qk20150728.1bvq001415 KI-generiert

Interim relief for constitutional complaint rejected due to failure to meet § 23 BVerfGG substantiation requirements

Geschäftsnummer 1 BvQ 14/15
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Deutschland (DE)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Nichteintreten / Unzulässig (Inadmissible)
Originalquelle öffnen Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The Federal Constitutional Court dismissed the applicant's request for interim relief, ruling the application inadmissible and issuing an unchallengeable order. The dispute involved a request for provisional protection, where the applicant failed to substantiate the urgency and likelihood of success required for such measures. The decisive legal basis was Section 23, Paragraph 1, Sentence 2 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), which mandates specific justification requirements for constitutional complaints; the Court held that these standards apply equally to applications for interim relief, and the applicant's filing did not meet this threshold.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

§ 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 BVerfGG, § 23 Abs. 1 S. 2 BVerfGG; Interim relief for constitutional complaint rejected due to failure to meet § 23 BVerfGG substantiation requirements: The dispute involved a request for provisional protection, where the applicant failed to substantiate the urgency and likelihood of success required for such measures. The decisive legal basis was Section 23, Paragraph 1, Sentence 2 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), which mandates specific justification requirements for constitutional complaints; the Court held that these standards apply equally to applications for interim relief, and the applicant's filing did not meet this threshold.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
verfassungsmässige Anforderung Vorläufiger Rechtsschutz Gesetzlicher Schutz Verfassungsbeschwerde im Ausland Eilvorabentscheidungsverfahren provisorische Rechtsöffnung

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
§ 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 BVerfGG
BVerfGE 122, 63 ) - Begründungsanforderungen des § 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 BVerfGG.
§ 23 Abs. 1 S. 2 BVerfGG
Cited in the dispositive as the specific legal basis for declaring the application for interim relief inadmissible due to failure to meet justification requirements.

Zitierte Rechtsprechung

KI-generiert
BVerfGE 122, 63
BVerfGE 122, 63 ) - Begründungsanforderungen des § 23 Abs.
KI-generiert
2 BvQ 63/22
Constitutional complaint for interim relief rejected due to insufficient substantiation of § 32(1) BVerfGG requirements
2 BvR 671/26
Denial of interim relief in constitutional complaint for failure to substantiate potential fundamental rights violation under BVerfGG
2 BvQ 101/18
Constitutional interim relief denied for failure to substantiate the principle of subsidiarity of constitutional complaints
1 BvR 1672/19
Interim relief in constitutional complaints: rejection due to insufficient substantiation of severe disadvantages and urgency.
1 BvQ 66/17
Denial of interim relief due to manifest lack of substantiation of constitutional complaint

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
§ 23 Abs. 1 S. 2 BVerfGG

Cited in the dispositive as the specific legal basis for declaring the application for interim relief inadmissible due to failure to meet justification requirements.

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

Ablehnung des Erlasses einer eA mangels hinreichender Begründung (§ 23 Abs 1 S 2 BVerfGG)

[GRUENDE]

Der Antrag ist unzulässig. Er genügt nicht den - auch im Verfahren des einstweiligen Rechtsschutzes geltenden (vgl. BVerfGE 122, 63 ) - Begründungsanforderungen des § 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 BVerfGG.

Die Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.