Article contents
Judicial Selection Controversy at the Federal Court of Justice
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 March 2019
Abstract
![Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'](https://static.cambridge.org/content/id/urn%3Acambridge.org%3Aid%3Aarticle%3AS2071832200003473/resource/name/firstPage-S2071832200003473a.jpg)
- Type
- Other
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2001 by German Law Journal GbR
References
(1) There are four other federal high courts, each serving a specific jurisdictional field: Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Federal Administrative Court), Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Financial/Tax Court), Bundesarbeitsgericht (Federal Labor Court) and Bundessozialgericht (Federal Social Security Court).Google Scholar
(2) Article 100.1 of the Basic Law stipulates: “If a court concludes that a law on whose validity its decision depends is unconstitutional, the proceedings shall be stayed, and a decision obtained from the Federal Constitutional Court where the Basic Law is held to be violated.”Google Scholar
(3) Claus Arndt, Letter to the Editor, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 03 March 2001.Google Scholar
(4) The Christian Democrats made a stronger showing in the election than pollsters had predicted.Google Scholar
(5) Gaugele, Jochen “Aufstand der Richter am BGH,” Welt am Sonntag, 25 Februar 2001.Google Scholar
(6) Hans-Ernst Böttcher “Dies erinnert bedrückend an vergleichbare Kampagnen in der Weimarer Republik”, Frankfurter Rundschau, 06 march 2001.Google Scholar
(7) Bundesministerium der Justiz, Referat für Presse-und Öffentlichkeitsarbeit, 11015 Berlin, 30 September 2000, <>>Google Scholar
(8) Baur, F. “Richterwahl und Gewaltenteilung”, 49 DEUTSCHE RICHTERZEITUNG 1971, p. 401, at 403.Google Scholar
(9) Id. at 404.Google Scholar
(10) Roellecke, Gerd “Der Charme des elften Bewerbers”, FRANKFURTER ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG, 12. March 2001.Google Scholar
- 2
- Cited by