Is the minimum wage constitutional
Federal Constitutional Court
1. The principle of subsidiarity requires that, before a constitutional complaint is lodged, all available procedural options are used to correct the alleged violation of the constitution or to prevent a violation of fundamental rights (see BVerfGE 123, 148 <172>; 134, 242 <285 para. 150>; established case-law). Therefore, a constitutional complaint is inadmissible if legal protection can be obtained in a reasonable manner by referring to the specialized courts. This is even to be demanded if the law leaves no room for interpretation, discretion or assessment that would allow the specialized courts to avoid the asserted violation of fundamental rights by virtue of their own decision-making authority (see BVerfGE 123, 148 <173>). Although the professional judicial review for the complainant can at best lead to the fact that the legal regulation that is disadvantageous to them under Article 100.1 of the Basic Law is submitted to the Federal Constitutional Court, it is regularly necessary in order to avoid the Federal Constitutional Court being placed on an uncertain factual and legal basis makes far-reaching decisions (see BVerfGE 123, 148 <173> mwN; BVerfG, decision of the First Senate of January 14, 2015 - 1 BvR 931/12 -, www.bverfg.de, Rn. 23). Exceptionally, the obligation to appeal to the specialized courts does not exist if the challenged regulation forces the complainant to make arrangements that can no longer be corrected later (see BVerfGE 43, 291 <387>; 60, 360 <372>), or if the referral to the specialized courts is unreasonable, for example because that would be obviously pointless and futile (cf.BVerfGE 55, 154 <157>; 65, 1 <38>; 102, 197 <208>), or if a matter is specifically constitutional Raises questions that the Federal Constitutional Court ultimately has to answer without expecting an improved basis for decision-making from a previous specialist judicial review (cf. BVerfGE 123, 148 <172 f.>). In addition, it is unreasonable to violate a legal norm that is subject to fines or fines before filing a constitutional complaint and to expose yourself to the risk of punishment in order to then be able to assert the unconstitutionality of the norm in criminal or administrative fine proceedings (cf. BVerfGE 81, 70 <82 f.>; 97, 157 <165>; BVerfG, decision of the First Senate of January 14, 2015 - 1 BvR 931/12 -, www.bverfg.de, Rn. 23).
- How can you keep your boat clean?
- Which NASA missions failed?
- How did you start your successful business
- What skills are required for MLM marketing
- What makes human love so special
- What is a milling machine
- Which US coins are made of silver
- How poor are the poorest 1
- What is the healthiest pizza to eat
- What kind of dog is Snoopy
- Where can I get high quality newsletter services
- To what extent does Schopenhauer influence Nietzsche
- Is MailChimp better than constant contact
- Which wordpress hosting is best and cheap
- What are you doing on Christmas Day 2015
- Can i blog with godaddy?
- Why can't cattle be vaccinated against TB
- If the space is infinite, it would not repeat itself
- How does the Bible define witchcraft
- Why is extreme pleasure actually intense pain?
- Which European country has the cheapest prostitutes?
- Death is life and life is death
- An economist is paid high
- Protein powders are a hype