Source: http://www.bverfg.de/en/decisions.html
Timestamp: 2013-05-24 23:42:33
Document Index: 123837128

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 3', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 36', '§ 54']

2 BvR 1390/12, 2 BvR 1421/12, 2 BvR 1438/12, 2 BvR 1439/12, 2 BvR 1440/12, 2 BvE 6/12
of 09/12/2012
of 07/18/2012
The proceedings on the constitutionality of a specific statute raise the question whether the amount of the cash benefit provided for in the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act to secure one´s existence is compatible with the Basic Law.
of 02/28/2012
The dispute between supreme federal bodies (Organstreit) relates to the legal position of the Bundestag members with regard to the overall budgetary responsibility of the German Bundestag in connection with the European Stabilisation Mechanism.
1 BvL 21/11
of 01/24/2012
of 09/07/2011
of 07/19/2011
The constitutional complaint gives rise to the question of whether legal entities domiciled outside of Germany, but in a Member State of the European Union, may invoke fundamental rights of the Basic Law (Grundgesetz � GG). Moreover, it relates to compliance with the fundamental right of property in the interpretation and application of national law based on Union law.
of 02/22/2011
The complainant�s constitutional complaint is directed at the judgments of the civil courts affirming a ban on the stock corporation that operates Frankfurt airport and in which the majority of shares are publicly owned; such ban permanently prohibits the complainant from using the airport for expressions of opinion and demonstrations without the stock corporation�s permission.
of 11/24/2010
The application for judicial review concerns the compatibility of provisions of the Act on the Regulation of Genetic Engineering (Gesetz zur Regelung der Gentechnik, Gentechnikgesetz � Genetic Engineering Act � GenTG �in the version promulgated on 16 December 1993, BGBl I p. 2066; most recently amended by Article 12 of the Act on the Reform of the Law of the Protection of Nature and Landscape Conservation (Gesetz zur Neuregelung des Rechts des Naturschutzes und der Landschaftspflege) of 29 July 2009, BGBl I p.2542) with the Basic Law. The challenge concerns provisions on the definitions of �genetically modified organism� and �placing on the market� (§ 3 nos. 3 and 6 GenTG), on the location register (§ 16a.1, 16a.3, 16a.4, 16a.5 and § 16b.1a GenTG), on the treatment of products placed on the market (§ 16b.1, 16b.2, 16b.3 and 16b.4 GenTG) and on claims in the case of interference with use (§ 36a GenTG) which are based on the Act on the Reform of the Law of Genetic Engineering (Gesetz zur Neuordnung des Gentechnikrechts (hereinafter: Genetic Engineering Reform Act 2004 (Gentechnikneuordnungsgesetz 2004 � GenTNeuOG 2004) of 21 December 2004 (BGBl I 2005 p.186) and the Act to Amend the Genetic Engineering Act, to Amend the Genetic Engineering Implementation Act and to Amend the Novel Foods and Novel Food Ingredients Ordinance (hereinafter: Genetic Engineering Amendment Act 2008 (Gentechnikänderungsgesetz 2008 - GenTÄndG 2008) of 1 April 2008 (BGBl I p. 499).
of 08/30/2010
In essence, the constitutional complaint relates to the question as to whether the Federal Court of Justice, in rejecting a payment obligation (reprographic levy) for printers and plotters on the basis of § 54a of the Copyright Act (Urheberrechtsgesetz - UrhG) in the version applicable until 31 December 2007 on the basis of the Act for the Reform of the Patent Fee Act and Other Acts (Gesetz zur Änderung des Patentgebührengesetzes und anderer Gesetze) of 25 July 1994, Federal Law Gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt - BGBl) I p. 1739 (hereinafter UrhG old), violates constitutional rights of copyright holders or of the complainant as a copyright collecting society.
see also english press release of 09/21/2010
of 07/21/2010
The constitutional complaint relates to the question as to whether it is compatible with the Basic Law that it is not possible under the relevant provisions of family law for parental custody of children born out of wedlock to be transferred in part or solely to the father against the mother�s will, where the situation does not qualify for removal of parental custody under � 1666 of the Civil Code.
The constitutional complaints relate to the unequal treatment of registered civil partners and spouses under the Gift and Inheritance Tax Act in the version according to the 1997 Annual Tax Reform Act of 20 December 1996 (Federal Law Gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt � BGBl) I p. 2049).
of 07/06/2010
of 07/07/2009
The constitutional complaint relates to the unequal treatment of marriage and registered civil partnerships with regard to survivors� pensions under an occupational pension scheme for employees in the civil service according to the Rules of the Supplementary Pensions Agency for Federal and Länder Employees (Versorgungsanstalt des Bundes und der Länder � VBL).