Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
1 BvQ 152/20, 1 BvQ 153/20, 1 BvQ 154/20, 1 BvQ 155/20, 1 BvQ 156/20, 1 BvQ 157/20 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2020:qk20201229.1bvq015220 KI-generiert

Interim injunctions against entry into force of the Occupational Safety Control Act

Geschäftsnummer 1 BvQ 152/20, 1 BvQ 153/20, 1 BvQ 154/20, 1 BvQ 155/20, 1 BvQ 156/20, 1 BvQ 157/20
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Deutschland (DE)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Abgewiesen (Dismissed)
Originalquelle öffnen Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The German Federal Constitutional Court rejected the applications for interim injunctions, with the applicants prevailing in neither the immediate procedural outcome nor the underlying challenge. The dispute concerned the entry into force of specific provisions of the Occupational Safety Control Act (Arbeitsschutzkontrollgesetz), with the applicants seeking a provisional halt to the legislative changes through an urgent constitutional complaint procedure. The Court ordered the rejection of the requests under § 32 Abs. 5 S. 1 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), meaning the challenged statutory provisions remained in effect without a suspensive order, and the full reasoning for this decision was to be communicated separately rather than published in the operative text.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

§ 32 Abs. 5 Satz 2 BVerfGG; Interim injunctions against entry into force of the Occupational Safety Control Act: The dispute concerned the entry into force of specific provisions of the Occupational Safety Control Act (Arbeitsschutzkontrollgesetz), with the applicants seeking a provisional halt to the legislative changes through an urgent constitutional complaint procedure. The Court ordered the rejection of the requests under § 32 Abs. 5 S. 1 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), meaning the challenged statutory provisions remained in effect without a suspensive order, and the full reasoning for this decision was to be communicated separately rather than published in the operative text.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Arbeitssicherheit Inkrafttreten "Vorläufige Geltung" Prozesshandlung Sicherheitsbedenken Gewerberecht

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
§ 32 Abs. 5 Satz 2 BVerfGG
Procedural rule applied in the dispositive to state that the reasoning for the rejection of the interim injunction applications will be communicated separately.
KI-generiert
1 BvQ 165/20, 1 BvQ 166/20, 1 BvQ 167/20
Interim relief to suspend entry into force of Occupational Safety Supervision Act amendments
1 BvR 842/17
Inapplicability of interim suspension to strike-breaking ban in agency employment law
2 BvQ 39/16
Insufficient substantiation of isolated interim injunction application and failure to demonstrate admissibility of main constitutional complaint

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
§ 32 Abs. 5 Satz 2 BVerfGG

Procedural rule applied in the dispositive to state that the reasoning for the rejection of the interim injunction applications will be communicated separately.

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

Erfolglose Eilanträge betreffend das Inkrafttreten von Teilen des Arbeitsschutzkontrollgesetzes - Bekanntgabe der Entscheidung ohne Begründung gem § 32 Abs 5 S 1 BVerfGG

[TENOR]

Die Anträge auf Erlass einer einstweiligen Anordnung werden abgelehnt.

[GRUENDE]

Die Begründung der Entscheidung wird gemäß § 32 Abs. 5 Satz 2 BVerfGG gesondert übermittelt.