Constitutional appeal dismissed due to lack of exhaustion of judicial remedies and insufficient constitutional content.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Constitutional Court declared inadmissible the appeal filed by Don José María Vilaclara Mir against a first-instance court order suspending enforcement proceedings. The applicant argued that the suspension violated his right to a court under Article 24.1 of the Constitution, but the court found no exhaustion of judicial remedies and insufficient constitutional content in the claim. Consequently, the appeal was rejected because the applicant failed to demonstrate that all ordinary legal avenues had been fully utilized or that the case presented a genuine constitutional issue.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 24.1 C.E.; Art. 43 C.E.: The Constitutional Court rejects an appeal for protection of rights when the applicant has not exhausted judicial remedies or fails to demonstrate sufficient constitutional content in the claim.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedFull text
*Este auto no incorpora doctrina constitucional.*
Identificación
Órgano
Sección Tercera
Magistrados
Doña Gloria Begué Cantón, don Fernando García-Mon y González-Regueral y don Jesús Leguina Villa.
Número y fecha BOE
Tipo y número de registro
Recurso de amparo 286-1987
Fecha de resolución
24/06/1987
Síntesis y resumen
Síntesis Descriptiva
Acordando la inadmisión a trámite del recurso de amparo 286/1987
Resumen
Inadmisión. Agotamiento de recursos en la vía judicial: inexistencia. Contenido constitucional de la demanda: carencia.
Don José María Vilaclara Mir interpone recurso de amparo contra providencia del Juzgado de Primera Instancia de Manresa, que deja en suspenso las diligencias de ejecución dimanantes de Sentencia recaída en juicio de interdicto de recobrar. Invoca la
vulneración del derecho consagrado en el art. 24.1 de la C.E.
containers
Visualización
containers