Key legal question
Whether the constitutional complaint was admissible after the advance costs were not paid within the deadline.
Extracted holding
The court did not enter on the complaint because the advance costs were neither paid in cash nor properly credited and evidenced within the non-extendable deadline.
Extracted reasoning
Despite a warning of non-entry under Art. 62(3) BGG, the complainant failed to comply with the advance-cost order and did not provide proof of timely payment after the deadline extension request was refused.