Kernrechtsfrage
Whether the constitutional complaint was admissible despite the later cantonal non-entry decision.
Extrahierter Entscheid
No admissible legal interest existed because the cantonal court had already issued a non-entry decision for failure to pay the advance, so setting aside the advance-payment order could no longer affect the parties' position.
Extrahierte Begründung
Art. 115 lit. b BGG requires a legally protected interest in the annulment or modification of the challenged decision. Since the subsequent non-entry decision was already in force before the federal filing, the complaint could not remedy the decisive procedural consequence. The complainant could separately challenge the non-entry decision within time.