Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
1 BvR 1634/18 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2020:rk20200605.1bvr163418 Generato dall'IA

Constitutional complaint dismissed without reasoning and abusive recusal motion rejected as inadmissible

Numero d'incarto 1 BvR 1634/18
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Inammissibile (Inadmissible)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Constitutional Court rejected a constitutional complaint without further reasoning and denied the applicant's request for legal aid, while dismissing a motion for the recusal of a judge as inadmissible due to abusive litigation. The case involved a constitutional complaint that was not accepted for decision, along with a procedural challenge to the participation of a specific judge in the chamber. Relying on § 93d(1) sentence 3 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act, the court dispensed with providing substantive grounds for its non-acceptance decision, determining that the complaint lacked sufficient merit and that the recusal request constituted an abusive use of legal process, leaving the challenged matters unresolved at the constitutional level.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG; Constitutional complaint dismissed without reasoning and abusive recusal motion rejected as inadmissible: Die Verfassungsbeschwerde ist nicht zur Entscheidung anzunehmen. Von einer Begründung wird nach § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG abgesehen.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
domanda di ricusazione motivazione inadeguata delle censure costituzionali motivazione nel merito atto processuale diritto alla risoluzione del contratto ritiro della querela penale

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG
Von einer Begründung wird nach § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG abgesehen.
Generato dall'IA
1 BvR 2662/15
Abusive recusal motions and non-acceptance of constitutional complaint in parallel decision
1 BvR 1452/16
Constitutional complaint and recusal motion: Inadmissibility of recusal without substantive partiality evidence and lack of acceptance criteria for constitutional complaint
1 BvR 2492/15
Recusal as abuse of right; dismissal of constitutional complaint without substantive review
2 BvR 1622/22
Unsubstantiated recusal motion and insufficiently reasoned constitutional complaint
1 BvR 1126/17
Rejection of manifestly inadmissible recusal motions and non-admission of constitutional complaint without further reasoning under § 93d BVerfGG

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

Nichtannahme einer Verfassungsbeschwerde ohne weitere Begründung - Verwerfung eines rechtsmissbräuchlichen, mithin unzulässigen Ablehnungsgesuchs

[TENOR]

Der Antrag auf Ablehnung der Richterin Baer wird als unzulässig verworfen.

Der Antrag auf Bewilligung von Prozesskostenhilfe und Beiordnung eines Rechtsanwalts wird abgelehnt, weil die beabsichtigte Rechtsverfolgung keine hinreichende Aussicht auf Erfolg bietet.

Die Verfassungsbeschwerde wird nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen.

[GRUENDE]

Die Kammer entscheidet unter Mitwirkung der Richterin Baer. Das gegen sie angebrachte Ablehnungsgesuch ist rechtsmissbräuchlich.

Die Verfassungsbeschwerde ist nicht zur Entscheidung anzunehmen. Von einer Begründung wird nach § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG abgesehen.

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.