Non-admission of constitutional complaint for lack of serious disadvantage

BVerfG 2 BvR 1867/13Bverfg / 2. Senat 2. KammerFeb 23, 2015Dismissed

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Constitutional Court, 2nd Senate, 2nd Chamber, refused to admit the complainant’s constitutional complaint. It held that the conditions for acceptance were not met because the complainant did not face a serious disadvantage from the non-admission. The decision is final and not subject to appeal.

Omnilex headnote

§ 93a Abs. 2 Buchst. b BVerfGG; § 93d Abs. 1 S. 3 BVerfGG: A constitutional complaint is to be accepted only where this is indicated for the enforcement of constitutional rights or where the complainant would otherwise suffer a serious disadvantage. The serious-disadvantage threshold is not met where, on a chamber-level assessment, the consequences of non-admission do not weigh with sufficient intensity against the complainant; the chamber may rely on established case law for this appraisal (consid. n.a.). In such a case, the complaint is not admitted without further reasoning.

Full text

BVerfG — 2 BvR 1867/13, Kammerbeschluss ohne Begründung

Entscheidungsdatum: 2015-02-23

Aktenzeichen: 2 BvR 1867/13

ECLI: ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2015:rk20150223.2bvr186713

Dokumenttyp: Kammerbeschluss ohne Begründung

Normen: § 93a Abs 2 Buchst b BVerfGG, § 93d Abs 1 S 3 BVerfGG

Vorinstanz: vorgehend OLG Stuttgart, 26. Juli 2013, Az: 4a Ws 155/13(V), Beschlussvorgehend LG Heilbronn, 11. Juni 2013, Az: 9 StVK 705/12 HN, Beschluss

Spruchkörper: 2. Senat 2. Kammer

Titelzeile

Nichtannahme einer Urteilsverfassungsbeschwerde mangels eines schweren Nachteils für den Beschwerdeführer

Tenor

Die Verfassungsbeschwerde wird nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen, da dem Beschwerdeführer durch die Nichtannahme kein schwerer Nachteil entsteht (vgl. BVerfG, Beschluss der 2. Kammer des Zweiten Senats vom 15. September 2014 - 2 BvR 2192/13 -, juris).

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.

Keywords

constitutional complaintadmissibilityserious disadvantagenon-admissionchamber decision

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether the constitutional complaint should be admitted despite the absence of a serious disadvantage to the complainant.

Extracted holding

The complaint was not admitted because the complainant would not suffer a serious disadvantage from the non-admission.

Extracted reasoning

Admission requirements under § 93a(2)(b) BVerfGG were not met; the Court referred to its prior chamber case law on the serious-disadvantage threshold.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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