Unacceptable constitutional complaint against UVSV ordinance

BVerfG 1 BvR 413/12Bverfg / 1. Senat 1. Kammer10 de abr. de 2012Inadmissible

Abrir fonte

Extraído pela Omnilex

Resumo Omnilex

The Federal Constitutional Court did not admit the constitutional complaint against the ordinance on artificial ultraviolet radiation. It held that the complaint was inadmissible because the complainant had not first sought protection before the competent specialist courts, possibly through an administrative declaratory action under § 43 VwGO. The Court also saw no reason to make a prior referral or decision under § 90(2) sentence 2 BVerfGG, as the case turned on ordinary-law and factual questions. No further reasons were given.

Sumário Omnilex

§ 90 Abs. 2 S. 1, S. 2 BVerfGG; Subsidiarity of the constitutional complaint and prior exhaustion of remedies; a constitutional complaint is inadmissible if the complainant can and must first seek effective protection before the competent specialist courts, including a declaratory action where appropriate. A prior decision by the Federal Constitutional Court under § 90(2) sentence 2 BVerfGG is exceptional and requires special reasons; it is not warranted where the challenged measure raises primarily factual and ordinary-law issues that should be clarified in the regular courts.

Texto completo

BVerfG — 1 BvR 413/12, Nichtannahmebeschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2012-04-10

Aktenzeichen: 1 BvR 413/12

ECLI: ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2012:rk20120410.1bvr041312

Dokumenttyp: Nichtannahmebeschluss

Normen: § 90 Abs 2 S 1 BVerfGG, § 90 Abs 2 S 2 BVerfGG, UVSV

Spruchkörper: 1. Senat 1. Kammer

Titelzeile

Nichtannahmebeschluss: Unzulässige Rechtssatzverfassungsbeschwerde gegen "Verordnung zum Schutz vor schädlichen Wirkungen künstlicher ultravioletter Strahlung" (juris: UVSV) - Keine Veranlassung für Vorabentscheidung (§ 90 Abs 2 S 2 BVerfGG) über Verfassungsmäßigkeit vor Rechtswegerschöpfung

Gründe

1 Die Verfassungsbeschwerde wird nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen, weil sie unzulässig ist.

2 Der Grundsatz der Subsidiarität der Verfassungsbeschwerde gebietet, dass die Beschwerdeführerin zunächst um fachgerichtlichen Rechtsschutz, gegebenenfalls in Form einer verwaltungsgerichtlichen Feststellungsklage gemäß § 43 VwGO, nachsucht (vgl. BVerfGE 115, 81 <91 ff.>).

3 Für eine Vorabentscheidung nach § 90 Abs. 2 Satz 2 BVerfGG besteht angesichts der von der Beschwerdeführerin aufgeworfenen einfachrechtlichen und tatsächlichen Fragen keine Veranlassung.

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

5 Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.

Palavras-chave

constitutional complaintsubsidiarityexhaustion of remediesinadmissibilitydeclaratory actionprior decisionadministrative lawultraviolet radiation

Extraído pela Omnilex

Questões jurídicas principais extraídas pela Omnilex

Questão jurídica principal

Whether the constitutional complaint was admissible despite lack of prior exhaustion of ordinary legal remedies.

Decisão extraída

The complaint was inadmissible because the complainant had first to seek judicial protection before the specialized courts, if necessary by an administrative declaratory action.

Fundamentação extraída

Under the subsidiarity principle, a constitutional complaint generally requires prior recourse to available specialist court remedies. No reason existed for a prior decision under § 90(2) sentence 2 BVerfGG because the complaint raised factual and ordinary-law questions that should be clarified in the specialist courts.

Questão jurídica principal

Whether a prior decision on the constitutionality of the challenged ordinance should be made under § 90(2) sentence 2 BVerfGG.

Decisão extraída

No such prior decision was warranted.

Fundamentação extraída

Given the simple-law and factual issues raised, there was no basis to bypass exhaustion of legal remedies and decide constitutionality in advance.

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.