projects

Constitutional complaint not accepted; no fundamental rights violation

BVerfG 1 BvR 2371/13Bverfg / 1. Senat 1. KammerSep 23, 2015Dismissed

Open source

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Constitutional Court did not accept the constitutional complaint against a Federal Court of Justice decision concerning pension equalization. It held that the challenged decision did not violate the complainant's fundamental rights, because the legal situation as interpreted by the Federal Court of Justice was constitutionally unobjectionable. The Court therefore gave no further reasons under § 93d(1) sentence 3 BVerfGG. The decision is final.

Omnilex headnote

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG; constitutional complaint against interpretation and application of the pension equalization provisions in the light of fundamental rights; no acceptance where the challenged decision is constitutionally unobjectionable. The Federal Constitutional Court may refrain from further reasoning if the complaint does not disclose a violation of fundamental rights. A construction of the relevant pension equalization rules by the Federal Court of Justice is reviewable only for constitutional compatibility; absent such incompatibility, the complaint is not admitted.

Full text

BVerfG — 1 BvR 2371/13, Nichtannahmebeschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2015-09-23

Aktenzeichen: 1 BvR 2371/13

ECLI: ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2015:rk20150923.1bvr237113

Dokumenttyp: Nichtannahmebeschluss

Normen: § 93d Abs 1 S 3 BVerfGG, §§ 9ff VersAusglG, §§ 20ff VersAusglG, § 9 VersAusglG, § 20 VersAusglG, § 51 Abs 1 VersAusglG

Vorinstanz: vorgehend BGH, 24. Juli 2013, Az: XII ZB 340/11, Beschluss

Spruchkörper: 1. Senat 1. Kammer

Titelzeile

Nichtannahmebeschluss: keine Verletzung von Grundrechten durch angegriffene Entscheidung

Gründe

1 Die angegriffene Entscheidung verletzt die Beschwerdeführerin nicht in ihren Grundrechten. Insbesondere ist die zugrundeliegende Rechtslage in der vom Bundesgerichtshof gewählten Auslegung mit den Grundrechten der Beschwerdeführerin vereinbar.

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

3 Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.

Keywords

constitutional complaintfundamental rightspension equalizationnon-acceptancejudicial review

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether the challenged decision violated the complainant's fundamental rights in the interpretation and application of the pension equalization rules

Extracted holding

No fundamental rights violation was found; the legal position as interpreted by the Federal Court of Justice was compatible with the complainant's fundamental rights.

Extracted reasoning

The Court saw no constitutional objection to the underlying legal situation as construed by the Federal Court of Justice and therefore saw no need for further reasoning under § 93d(1) sentence 3 BVerfGG.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.