Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
1 BvQ 92/19 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2020:qk20200109.1bvq009219 Generato dall'IA

Urgency requirement for interim relief under § 32 Abs. 1 BVerfGG

Numero d'incarto 1 BvQ 92/19
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Respinto (Dismissed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany’s First Senate (First Chamber) denied the application for the issuance of interim injunctive relief, rejecting the requester's claim and leaving the status quo in force. The case involved a request for an *einstweilige Anordnung* (temporary order), where the court determined that the applicant failed to demonstrate the requisite urgency for provisional judicial intervention. The decisive legal basis was § 32 Abs. 1 BVerfGG, which mandates that interim relief is only granted if a provisional regulation is urgently necessary; the court concluded that this threshold of urgency was not met, rendering the decision final and unchallengeable.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 32 Abs 1 BVerfGG; Urgency requirement for interim relief under § 32 Abs. 1 BVerfGG: The case involved a request for an *einstweilige Anordnung* (temporary order), where the court determined that the applicant failed to demonstrate the requisite urgency for provisional judicial intervention. The decisive legal basis was § 32 Abs. 1 BVerfGG, which mandates that interim relief is only granted if a provisional regulation is urgently necessary; the court concluded that this threshold of urgency was not met, rendering the decision final and unchallengeable.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
procedimento sommario carenza di urgenza requisito costituzionale procedimento pregiudiziale d'urgenza statuto giuridico inosservanza del termine legale

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 32 Abs 1 BVerfGG
Cited in the dispositive as the legal basis for denying the application for interim relief because a provisional regulation was not urgently required.
Generato dall'IA
1 BvR 1390/17
Interim injunctive relief denied for lack of substantiated serious disadvantages or general welfare necessity
1 BvQ 66/17
Denial of interim relief due to manifest lack of substantiation of constitutional complaint
2 BvQ 63/22
Constitutional complaint for interim relief rejected due to insufficient substantiation of § 32(1) BVerfGG requirements
1 BvQ 45/17
Interim constitutional relief denied due to failure to substantiate violation of specific fundamental rights against a non-act state measure
1 BvQ 85/23
Inadmissibility of interim constitutional relief for failure to substantiate the main complaint and submit challenged decisions

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 32 Abs. 1 BVerfGG

Cited in the dispositive as the legal basis for denying the application for interim relief because a provisional regulation was not urgently required.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Ablehnung des Erlasses einer eA mit Tenorbegründung: Vorläufige Regelung nicht iSd § 32 Abs 1 BVerfGG dringend geboten

[TENOR]

Der Antrag auf Erlass einer einstweiligen Anordnung wird abgelehnt, weil eine vorläufige Regelung nicht im Sinne von § 32 Abs. 1 BVerfGG dringend geboten ist.

[GRUENDE]

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.