Search

The article deals with a protest event near the Tesla factory in G, which was restricted by assembly law limitations. The Administrative Court of Potsdam has granted the applicant's request to restore the suspensive effect of the objection against the restrictions. The Higher Administrative Court of Berlin-Brandenburg has ruled that the duration of the protest action over several weeks does not question its qualification as an assembly. It has also been determined that a publicly accessible forest can be a suitable place for a constitutionally protected assembly. Furthermore, tree houses and other infrastructural facilities established in the protest camp may be covered by the scope of protection of the Basic Law. The Administrative Court has interpreted the regulation on the time limitation of the assembly as a shortening of the assembly duration, while the complaint argues that it is merely a temporarily limited confirmation. However, the Administrative Court agrees with the view that it is a constitutive regulation regarding the duration of the assembly. The complaint is also unsuccessful regarding the restriction of the assembly location. It is emphasized that general police law can only be invoked if assembly law is incomplete. It is also pointed out that the protective effect of the fundamental right to freedom of assembly must not be undermined by more generous intervention powers in special regulatory law. [Extracted from the article]

The article is about an unsuccessfully contested requirement to keep a logbook. An employee of a company exceeded the permissible maximum speed with a company vehicle and identified himself as the driver. However, he later claimed that the vehicle belonged to a friend and that he had only used it temporarily. The local court could not determine the responsible driver and dismissed the administrative offense proceedings. After a hearing, the opposing party ordered the applicant to keep a logbook for 15 months. The Higher Administrative Court rejected the application to restore the suspensive effect of the objection against the decision of the opposing party. The Bavarian Administrative Court has ruled that a requirement to keep a logbook can also be imposed if the vehicle owner is not responsible for the impossibility of determining the driver, but still contributed to the determination. [Extracted from the article]

The article deals with the jurisdiction of a collective municipality in Rhineland-Palatinate. The plaintiffs are owners of a property with an unpaved path. The collective municipality has issued orders to the plaintiffs to clear the path. The plaintiffs have lodged an objection and filed a lawsuit, as they believe that the collective municipality is not competent. The Administrative Court of Trier has decided that the collective municipality is indeed not competent for such orders, as it concerns a path that is not a public road and is exclusively used for the management of agricultural or forestry properties. Therefore, the orders are unlawful and must be revoked. [Extracted from the article]

The article deals with police orders in connection with the aggressiveness of a dog. The applicant is the owner of a miniature schnauzer dog named "Jessy". After two biting incidents in 2021 and 2022, in which the dog bit a postal worker and another person, the authority ordered to obtain an expert opinion from a veterinary expert to determine whether the dog should be classified as dangerous. In addition, a leash requirement and muzzle obligation outside the property were ordered. The applicant filed an objection, but her application for interim legal protection was rejected. The Higher Administrative Court of Saarland confirmed the legality of the orders, as objective circumstances indicate a potential danger posed by the dog. [Extracted from the article]

The article deals with the revocation of a firearms permit for a person who has been classified as a right-wing extremist. The district office has revoked the applicant's firearms possession permits and prohibited the transfer of firearms to third parties. The Administrative Court of Freiburg rejected the applicant's request, but upon the applicant's complaint, the suspensive effect of the objection was partially restored. It is stated that the classification as a right-wing extremist alone is not sufficient to assume unreliability in terms of firearms law. The decision on the reliability of a person in handling firearms is based on a prognosis of future behavior and must not impose excessive requirements. [Extracted from the article]

The article deals with an order to keep a logbook. A vehicle owner exceeded the permissible maximum speed outside of a built-up area by 28 km/h. Although the vehicle owner admitted the offense in writing, the fine proceedings were discontinued because the fine authority had doubts about his culpability. Subsequently, the vehicle owner was instructed to keep a logbook for 12 months. The administrative court rejected the application to restore the suspensive effect of the objection, as the order is obviously lawful. [Extracted from the article]

The article is about the determination of the dangerousness of a Rhodesian Ridgeback dog. The defendant classified the dog as dangerous and ordered it to be kept on a leash and wear a muzzle. This is based on a biting incident in which the dog bit and seriously injured two small dogs without warning. The administrative court rejected the applicant's request to restore the suspensive effect of his objection. The Higher Administrative Court of Saarland confirmed this decision and stated that the classification of the dog as dangerous is obviously lawful. [Extracted from the article]