Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
2 BvR 367/20 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2021:rk20210602.2bvr036720 Generato dall'IA

Constitutional complaint against non-acceptance of denial of procedural legal aid in civil proceedings

Numero d'incarto 2 BvR 367/20
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 declined to accept the constitutional complaint, leaving the lower court’s implicit denial of procedural legal aid in the underlying civil dispute in force. The complainant challenged the procedural handling of his second application for procedural legal aid in a civil case before the Ravensburg District Court, alleging a violation of his rights due to a perceived failure to properly process his response to the opposing party’s statement. The court held that no grounds for acceptance existed under § 93a Abs. 2 BVerfGG, as the complaint lacked both fundamental constitutional significance and the necessity to enforce the rights protected by § 90 Abs. 1 BVerfGG, noting that the complainant had failed to respond to the court's follow-up inquiries despite being properly notified of the opposing party’s submission.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 93a Abs. 2 BVerfGG, § 90 Abs. 1 BVerfGG, § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG; Constitutional complaint against non-acceptance of denial of procedural legal aid in civil proceedings: The complainant challenged the procedural handling of his second application for procedural legal aid in a civil case before the Ravensburg District Court, alleging a violation of his rights due to a perceived failure to properly process his response to the opposing party’s statement. The court held that no grounds for acceptance existed under § 93a Abs. 2 BVerfGG, as the complaint lacked both fundamental constitutional significance and the necessity to enforce the rights protected by § 90 Abs. 1 BVerfGG, noting that the complainant had failed to respond to the court's follow-up inquiries despite being properly notified of the opposing party’s submission.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
procedura di gratuito patrocinio violazione dei diritti procedurali causa civile motivazione inadeguata delle censure costituzionali diritti fondamentali soccorso d'emergenza costituzionale

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 93a Abs. 2 BVerfGG
The legal basis cited to determine that no grounds for acceptance of the constitutional complaint were present, resulting in the non-acceptance of the case.
§ 90 Abs. 1 BVerfGG
Der Verfassungsbeschwerde kommt weder grundsätzliche verfassungsrechtliche Bedeutung zu, noch ist ihre Annahme zur Durchsetzung der in § 90 Abs. 1 BVerfGG genannten Rechte des Beschwerdeführers angezeigt.
§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG
The procedural rule invoked to waive a further detailed justification for the decision.

Giurisprudenza citata

Generato dall'IA
5 C 19/20
Januar 2020 ist ausweislich der beigezogenen Akte des Amtsgerichts Ravensburg (5 C 19/20) am 23.
Generato dall'IA
1 BvR 1639/19
Denial of legal aid for planned constitutional complaint due to failure to plausibly demonstrate necessity and prospects of success
1 BvR 3060/11
Denial of legal aid and non-acceptance of constitutional complaint as inadmissible
1 BvR 30/20
Denial of legal aid and non-acceptance of constitutional complaint for failure to substantiate timely filing and fundamental rights violations in social court resumption proceedings
2 BvR 932/17
Denial of legal aid in constitutional complaint proceedings due to absence of necessity for legal representation
1 BvR 2217/21
Rejection of legal aid and constitutional complaint for failure to substantiate prospects of success and fundamental rights violation

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 93a Abs. 2 BVerfGG

The legal basis cited to determine that no grounds for acceptance of the constitutional complaint were present, resulting in the non-acceptance of the case.

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG

The procedural rule invoked to waive a further detailed justification for the decision.

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 bzgl PKH-Gewährung in einer Zivilsache

[TENOR]

Die Verfassungsbeschwerde wird nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen.

[GRUENDE]

Die Verfassungsbeschwerde ist nicht zur Entscheidung anzunehmen, da Annahmegründe gemäß § 93a Abs. 2 BVerfGG nicht gegeben sind. Der Verfassungsbeschwerde kommt weder grundsätzliche verfassungsrechtliche Bedeutung zu, noch ist ihre Annahme zur Durchsetzung der in § 90 Abs. 1 BVerfGG genannten Rechte des Beschwerdeführers angezeigt.

Der (zweite) Antrag des Beschwerdeführers auf Bewilligung von Prozesskostenhilfe vom 8. Januar 2020 ist ausweislich der beigezogenen Akte des Amtsgerichts Ravensburg (5 C 19/20) am 23. Januar 2020 der Antragsgegnerin des Ausgangsverfahrens ordnungsgemäß zugestellt worden. Auf deren Stellungnahme vom 7. Februar 2020, die dem Beschwerdeführer aufgrund Verfügung des Amtsgerichts vom 12. Februar 2020 übersandt worden ist, hat der Beschwerdeführer trotz weiterer Sachstandsanfrage des Amtsgerichts vom 9. März 2020 nicht reagiert. Der Beschwerdeführer, der nach Aktenlage keine Mitteilung von der Zustellung erhalten hat, scheint irrtümlich davon auszugehen, dass sich diese Sachstandsanfrage auf eine eigene Klage der Antragsgegnerin bezieht.

Von einer weiteren Begründung wird nach § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG abgesehen.

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.