Sufficiency of evidentiary showing for severe disadvantage in provisional injunction against mandatory testing, vaccination, or recovery in public transport
Deutschland (DE)
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Federal Constitutional Court rejected the request for a provisional injunction, leaving the challenged legislation in force and leaving the applicant without relief. The case concerned a constitutional law complaint challenging the mandatory 3G rule (vaccinated, recovered, or tested) imposed on passengers in public road, rail, and air transport under Section 28b(5), sentence 1, number 1 of the Infection Protection Act. The court determined that the application failed because the applicant did not sufficiently demonstrate a severe disadvantage within the meaning of Section 32 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act, nor did they establish that a subsequent constitutional complaint would not be inadmissible or manifestly unfounded from the outset.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 32 BVerfGG; Sufficiency of evidentiary showing for severe disadvantage in provisional injunction against mandatory testing, vaccination, or recovery in public transport: The case concerned a constitutional law complaint challenging the mandatory 3G rule (vaccinated, recovered, or tested) imposed on passengers in public road, rail, and air transport under Section 28b(5), sentence 1, number 1 of the Infection Protection Act. The court determined that the application failed because the applicant did not sufficiently demonstrate a severe disadvantage within the meaning of Section 32 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act, nor did they establish that a subsequent constitutional complaint would not be inadmissible or manifestly unfounded from the outset.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertCited in the dispositive as the criterion for the lack of a severe disadvantage, justifying the rejection of the request for a provisional injunction.
Volltext
Erfolgloser Eilantrag gegen "3G-Pflicht" im öffentlichen Personennah- und -fernverkehr sowie im Luftverkehr (§ 28b Abs 5 S 1 Nr 1 IfSG idF vom 22.11.2021) - unzureichende Antragsbegründung - Tenorbegründung
[TENOR]
Der Antrag auf Erlass einer einstweiligen Anordnung wird abgelehnt, weil weder ein schwerer Nachteil im Sinne des § 32 BVerfGG dargelegt ist noch, dass eine zu erhebende Verfassungsbeschwerde nicht von vornherein unzulässig oder offensichtlich unbegründet wäre.
[GRUENDE]
Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.