Dispute over a place in a school: parents successfully before the Federal constitutional court

since 2016 the parents of a girl, the a a of Saxony, houses the Gymnasium, was denied to suit now, the Federal constitutional court upheld for the second Time a complaint by the family. The Hessian administrative court (VGH) has to deal now again with the lawsuit. The Supreme Hessian administrative court had rejected a complaint by the family against a judgment of the administrative court of Frankfurt twice already, and the parents appealed to the Karlsruhe constitutional court judges.

Matthias Trautsch

editor in the Rhein-Main-Zeitung.

The litigation is also pursued by many other families in Frankfurt, because of the lack of space, suffering secondary schools reject there, every year, hundreds of children in the fifth grades. The headmaster is not allowed to select the fifth graders arbitrarily, but must comply with certain criteria. In case of doubt, the lot decides, in the meantime, a recording.

In the case of a girl who had learned in elementary French and in the French class of the Carl-Schurz-Schule in Sachsenhausen wanted to go. Although other, at that time, valid inclusion criteria were met according to the family, was referred the student to another school. The family trod the courts, but the administrative court of Frankfurt and, later, of the VGH in Kassel rejected the lawsuit. You referred to the legitimate expectations of the students, the commitment, the desire school, and their place in favour of the applicant Nachrückers not likely to lose.

VGH keeps the case done

The parents an appeal for the first Time a complaint to the Federal constitutional court and were successful. However, the VGH, to the the matter was referred, decided, again, not in terms of content, but argued that the case had been settled, because the pupil is now a higher class visits, in the Saxon houses the Gymnasium, receiving no more children. However, the family appealed again, complaint to the Federal constitutional court and now got again right.

Mirjam Rose, the lawyer of the family, said Monday on request, the Kassel judge had denied a substantive engagement with the concerns of the plaintiff from hard-to-follow reasons. Now, however, the VGH is forced to a "clear opinion on the selection process in Frankfurt and a legal dispute with our arguments".