The Federal constitutional court: the court does not have to comply with every desire
Courts do not need to align a trial completely in accordance with the Wishes of the parties to the proceedings. An autistic may not require a hearing by means of a several weeks straight Online to chat, participate, such as the Federal constitutional court in Karlsruhe in a Thursday, 3. January 2019, published decision, ruled (Az.: 1 BvR 957/18).
It dismissed a 42-year-old man from Chemnitz. He has autism in the Form of Asperger’s syndrome and is therefore limited in its social communication significantly.
At his request, the Chemnitzer recognized in him the social authority of a degree of disability (GdB) of 50. The Saxon state social court (LSG) increased this to 70, declined to a still higher GdB and other compensation for disadvantages.
Thus, the Chemnitz was not satisfied. With a complaint to the Federal social court (BSG) in Kassel he complained also of the proceedings of the LSG. At the hearing where he was due to his illness not able to attend. Inadmissible, the court rejected his involvement by several weeks straight Online Chat from home.
The BSG dismissed the complaint, however, right now, the Federal constitutional court confirmed. Also from the basic law, no obligation for the courts, negotiations complete according to the wishes of the parties to the proceedings to design is apparent.
While the courts should strive to take account of the health needs of the interested Parties. “This obligation is, however, not uneingeschränkt“, clear were the judges in Karlsruhe.
In the specific case, the Federal constitutional court referred to the “Unmittelbarkeitsgrundsatz“ of the hearing. This creates transparency and “rule of law unerlässlich“.
Here, the LSG have offered to the autistic people in the run-up to the summary of the written report of the proceedings, so that the disabled can prepare for the hearing. Also, the LSG had want to enable communication over a Computer in the hearing itself.
Generally speaking, the disabled, also represented by a lawyer and, if necessary, for assistance to get that will accompany you in the negotiation. Thus, their interests would be sufficiently safeguarded, was the Federal constitutional court, in its now in writing published decision of 27. November 2018.
Generally speaking, courts must strive but, the impairments of disabled people. Thus, the BSG had already ruled in 2013 that an Autist does not have to answer questions of a medical expert in direct contact (decision of 14. November 2013, Az.: B 9 SB 5/13; JurAgentur message of 30. December 2013).
Blind people can ask for a decision of the Federal constitutional court in the difficult process of a Transmission of the court records in Braille (decision from 10. October 2014, Az.: 1 BvR 856/13; JurAgentur message from 31. October, 2014). mwo/fle