Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
1 BvR 575/16 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2016:rk20160324.1bvr057516 KI-generiert

Standing of statutory guardian to file constitutional complaint on behalf of children under § 158 Abs. 4 Satz 5 FamFG

Geschäftsnummer 1 BvR 575/16
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 constitutional complaint without merits review, rendering the related application for interim relief moot, and declined to decide whether a statutory guardian acting on behalf of children could file a constitutional complaint in their own name under § 158(4) sentence 5 FamFG. The case involved a constitutional complaint filed by a statutory guardian representing minor children in family law proceedings, where the specific procedural capacity of the guardian to assert fundamental rights independently was a threshold issue. The Court relied on the non-disclosure provisions of § 93d(1) sentence 3 BVerfGG to waive a detailed legal justification for the dismissal and referenced prior case law regarding the applicability of §§ 276(1) and (5) and 303(3) FamFG to the procedural standing of guardians in such contexts.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

§ 158 Abs. 4 Satz 5 FamFG, § 303 Abs. 3 FamFG, § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG, § 40 Abs. 3 GOBVerfG; Standing of statutory guardian to file constitutional complaint on behalf of children under § 158 Abs. 4 Satz 5 FamFG: The case involved a constitutional complaint filed by a statutory guardian representing minor children in family law proceedings, where the specific procedural capacity of the guardian to assert fundamental rights independently was a threshold issue. The Court relied on the non-disclosure provisions of § 93d(1) sentence 3 BVerfGG to waive a detailed legal justification for the dismissal and referenced prior case law regarding the applicability of §§ 276(1) and (5) and 303(3) FamFG to the procedural standing of guardians in such contexts.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
gesetzlicher Anspruch Rechte des Kindes minderjährige Kinder ungenügende Substantiierung von Grundrechtsverletzungen Verfahrensüberprüfung Rechtsfähigkeit

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
§ 158 Abs. 4 Satz 5 FamFG
Explicitly cited in the dispositive to define the procedural basis under which the statutory guardian claimed the right to file the constitutional complaint on behalf of the children.
§ 303 Abs. 3 FamFG
1 und 5, § 303 Abs. 3 FamFG BVerfG, Beschluss der 3.
§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG
Cited in the dispositive as the procedural basis for omitting a detailed written justification for the decision.
§ 40 Abs. 3 GOBVerfG
Cited in the dispositive to establish that the application for interim relief became moot following the non-acceptance of the constitutional complaint.

Zitierte Rechtsprechung

KI-generiert
1 BvR 372/13
Scope of procedural guardian mandate in guardianship proceedings: authority to file constitutional complaint
KI-generiert
1 BvR 758/21
Admissibility of constitutional complaint regarding appointment of supplementary guardian for minor’s inheritance rejection and protection of minor’s property rights
1 BvR 1734/19
Inadmissibility of constitutional complaint due to lack of parental representation authority and failure to exhaust subsidiarity via non-hearing motion
1 BvR 372/13
Scope of procedural guardian mandate in guardianship proceedings: authority to file constitutional complaint
1 BvR 2324/23
Constitutional complaint for insufficient substantiation of statutory classification and applicable standard of review in challenging provisional child custody restrictions
1 BvR 1789/19
Constitutional complaint against child return enforcement: inadmissibility due to lack of reasoned grounds and failure to submit decision-relevant documents

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
§ 158 Abs. 4 Satz 5 FamFG

Explicitly cited in the dispositive to define the procedural basis under which the statutory guardian claimed the right to file the constitutional complaint on behalf of the children.

§ 40 Abs. 3 GOBVerfG

Cited in the dispositive to establish that the application for interim relief became moot following the non-acceptance of the constitutional complaint.

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG

Cited in the dispositive as the procedural basis for omitting a detailed written justification for the decision.

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

Nichtannahmebeschluss ohne Begründung

[TENOR]

Die Verfassungsbeschwerde wird nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen, ohne dass es hier einer Entscheidung darüber bedarf, ob die Beschwerdeführerin zu 2) als Verfahrensbeiständin der Kinder deren Grundrechte im eigenen Namen im Wege der Verfassungsbeschwerde nach § 158 Abs. 4 Satz 5 FamFG geltend machen kann (vgl. insoweit zu § 276 Abs. 1 und 5, § 303 Abs. 3 FamFG BVerfG, Beschluss der 3. Kammer des Ersten Senats vom 22. Mai 2013 - 1 BvR 372/13 -, juris, Rn. 4 ff.).

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

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

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.