Interim relief denied for insufficient substantiation and no exhaustion

BVerfG 1 BvQ 1/16Bverfg / 1. Senat 1. KammerJan 19, 2016Dismissed

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Constitutional Court rejected an application for interim constitutional relief. It held the request inadmissible because the applicant had not met the substantiation requirements applicable under § 23(1) sentence 2 BVerfGG, even in summary proceedings, and had not exhausted the remedies before the specialized courts as required by § 90(2) sentence 1 BVerfGG.

Omnilex headnote

§ 23 Abs. 1 S. 2, § 32 Abs. 1, § 90 Abs. 2 S. 1 BVerfGG; interim constitutional relief is inadmissible if the application is not sufficiently substantiated and the path to the ordinary courts has not been exhausted. The substantiation requirement applies equally in interim-relief proceedings; absent exhaustion of the specialised courts’ remedies, a constitutional application is generally barred (consid. 1).

Full text

BVerfG — 1 BvQ 1/16, Ablehnung einstweilige Anordnung

Entscheidungsdatum: 2016-01-19

Aktenzeichen: 1 BvQ 1/16

ECLI: ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2016:qk20160119.1bvq000116

Dokumenttyp: Ablehnung einstweilige Anordnung

Normen: § 23 Abs 1 S 2 BVerfGG, § 32 Abs 1 BVerfGG, § 90 Abs 2 S 1 BVerfGG

Spruchkörper: 1. Senat 1. Kammer

Titelzeile

Ablehnung des Erlasses einer einstweiligen Anordnung bei unzureichender Substantiierung und mangelnder Rechtswegerschöpfung

Gründe

1 Der Antrag ist unzulässig. Er genügt weder den - auch im Verfahren des einstweiligen Rechtsschutzes geltenden (vgl. BVerfGE 122, 63 <74>) - Begründungsanforderungen des § 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 BVerfGG noch ist der Rechtsweg zu den Fachgerichten erschöpft worden (§ 90 Abs. 2 Satz 1 BVerfGG).

Keywords

interim reliefadmissibilitysubstantiationexhaustion of remediesconstitutional complaint

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether the application for an interim injunction was admissible despite insufficient substantiation.

Extracted holding

No. The application did not satisfy the reasoning requirements applicable even in interim-relief proceedings.

Extracted reasoning

The application failed to meet the requirements of § 23(1) sentence 2 BVerfGG.

Key legal question

Whether the applicant had exhausted the remedies before the ordinary courts.

Extracted holding

No. The Court found that the judicial path to the specialized courts had not been exhausted.

Extracted reasoning

Under § 90(2) sentence 1 BVerfGG, constitutional relief generally requires prior exhaustion of the available legal remedies, which was lacking here.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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