Status: 11/22/2022 4:51 p.m
In the first wave of the pandemic, Bavarians were only allowed to go outside with a good reason – the Federal Administrative Court now declared this to be disproportionate. It assessed the situation in Saxony differently.
The exit restrictions in Bavaria during the first wave of the corona pandemic were disproportionate. That was decided by the Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig.
The court explained that mere contact restrictions could also have been considered as a milder corona protection measure. These would have “burdened the addressees less”. It was a “serious encroachment on fundamental rights,” said the presiding judge when the verdict was announced. This would only have been proportionate if – beyond the contact restrictions – it could have made a significant contribution to avoiding infections.
Back then, in Bavaria, people were only allowed to leave the house for a valid reason, such as going to work or doing sport alone. Merely lingering in the fresh air, on the other hand, was not allowed.
In October 2021, the Bavarian Administrative Court subsequently declared the curfew inadmissible. On the other hand, the Free State defended itself before the Federal Administrative Court, which now rejected the appeal.
Holetschek: The measure was correct
Bavaria’s Health Minister Klaus Holetschek said after the verdict that the state government was convinced “that the exit restrictions from the end of March to the beginning of April 2020 were an effective and correct means for the well-being and safety of the citizens of Bavaria from the point of view at the time”. Nothing will change about that “if the courts now come to a different assessment in retrospect”.
The government respects the decision and will “carefully analyze the reasons for the judgment and draw the necessary conclusions from them”.
Judgment also to Saxony
The Third Senate also ruled on the Corona measures in Saxony. The restrictions imposed by the Corona Protection Ordinance in force there were therefore lawful. Contact restrictions were imposed there, restaurants and cafes as well as sports facilities were closed.
On the other hand, a lawyer initially appealed to the Saxon Higher Administrative Court. This subsequently classified the measures as proportionate. The Federal Administrative Court has now confirmed this and rejected the appeal by the lawyer. The Infection Protection Act in its then version was a constitutional legal basis for the regulation, the court in Leipzig explained.
The legislature cannot foresee which pathogens will appear. It may only become necessary after a certain period of time to specify the prerequisites for protective measures for the specific disease. In Germany this happened in autumn 2020.
A whole series of similar corona proceedings are still pending at the Federal Administrative Court.
(AZ: 3CN 2.21, AZ: 3CN 1.21)