Constitutional Court dismisses amparo for lack of standing when applicant seeks free legal aid after losing appeal.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Constitutional Court dismissed the amparo filed by Carlos Retamal Garro and Emilio Ferreiro García regarding their inability to obtain free legal aid. The applicants, having lost a Supreme Court appeal, argued that Articles 14 and 24.1 of the Constitution were violated by the denial of free justice. The Court ruled that the applicants lacked standing because they were not the direct victims of the contested administrative act, as the denial of aid was a consequence of their prior litigation loss rather than an independent violation of their rights.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 14 C.E.; Art. 24.1 C.E.: The Constitutional Court lacks jurisdiction to examine an amparo when the applicant is not the direct victim of the challenged act, as standing requires a direct interest in the specific administrative decision under review.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedFull text
Esta resolución es accesible en formato PDF:
Identificación
Órgano
Sección Segunda
Magistrados
Don Carlos de la Vega Benayas, don Luis López Guerra y don José Vicente Gimeno Sendra.
Número y fecha BOE
Tipo y número de registro
Recurso de amparo 440-1989
Fecha de resolución
18/09/1989
Síntesis y resumen
Síntesis Descriptiva
Acordando el archivo de las actuaciones en el procedimiento 440/1989
Resumen
Demanda de amparo: inexistencia.
Carlos Retamal Garro y Emilio Ferreiro García. Sentencia de la Sala Segunda del Tribunal Supremo en casación de la dictada por la Audiencia Provincial de Avila el 16 de mayo de 1986. Arts. 14 y 24.1 C.E. Solicita justicia gratuita.
containers
Visualización
containers
[PDF] https://hj.tribunalconstitucional.es/HJ/PDF/1989/1989_00453-1989_00440.pdf