Individual-case law
Concept and definition of individual-case law
An individual-case law is a statute that refers to an individually determined or determinable circumstance and consequently regulates exclusively a single case. In contrast to abstract-general laws, which apply equally to a multitude of cases, individual-case law is characterized by its binding force solely for a single person, a specific object, or a concrete situation.
The legal classification of individual-case law is particularly relevant in constitutional law, as such laws are subject to scrutiny under the principles of equality, the separation of powers, and the rule of law.
Distinction: Individual-case law and abstract-general law
An individual-case law loses its validity as soon as the concrete situation regulated by the norm has been conclusively resolved. In contrast, general laws have a repeatable scope of application for indeterminate cases and groups of persons. The classification is not always determined by the wording of the law but rather by its actual regulatory substance. Thus, a law may appear abstract and general in its wording, but in fact (e.g., by designation of specific names, places, or events) regulate a single case.
Certain areas of law, such as budgetary law or the law on development planning, regularly work with statutes that at least partially have an individual-case-related effect and may therefore take on the character of an individual-case law.
Constitutional admissibility of individual-case law
Principle and constitutionally inherent limitations
In the German Basic Law (Grundgesetz), legislation is fundamentally shaped by the principles of abstraction and generality (see Art. 20 (3) GG – the principle of legality of administration). Individual-case laws are only permissible under narrow conditions. The most important constitutional limits derive from Art. 19 (1) sentence 1 GG, the equality principle of Art. 3 (1) GG, and the principle of separation of powers.
In particular, Art. 19 (1) sentence 1 GG stipulates that restrictions on fundamental rights provisions must apply generally and not solely for a single case. This is known as the prohibition of individual-case law in the domain of fundamental rights.
The prohibition of individual-case law
Art. 19 (1) sentence 1 GG states: “In so far as, under this Basic Law, a fundamental right may be restricted by or pursuant to a law, such law must apply generally and not merely to a single case.” From this follows an explicit ban on individual-case laws, insofar as they operate to the detriment of fundamental rights. Fundamental rights may therefore not be restricted by laws tailored specifically to a single case.
The Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) has repeatedly confirmed that laws designed to circumvent protection of fundamental rights by means of individual regulation are unconstitutional. Individual-case laws are permissible only insofar as they do not restrict fundamental rights or provide for special regulations for atypical constellations that can be objectively justified.
The constitutional requirement for legitimate differentiation
In addition to the constitutional prohibition of individual-case laws, any differentiation in laws requires an objectively justified basis (Art. 3 (1) GG), to prevent arbitrary individual-case regulations. This is to ensure that legislation does not deliberately favor or disadvantage individuals or groups without sufficient grounds.
Legal consequences and judicial review of individual-case law
If the prohibition of individual-case law is violated, the law in question is unconstitutional and void. Such invalidity can be established by the Federal Constitutional Court in Germany (through judicial review proceedings). In administrative and civil law, the scope of application of individual-case law may also be subject to judicial review, particularly where individual rights are affected.
An exception exists for so-called “individual-case application laws,” where the law does concern a single case, but this case objectively, comprehensibly deviates from a general rule and does not restrict any fundamental rights.
Practical examples of individual-case laws
Individual-case laws have been comparatively rare in the history of the Federal Republic of Germany, as the Basic Law sets high hurdles. Examples from the past are:
- Revocation of the immunity of a single member of parliament by special law (no longer necessary today as the Basic Law now regulates the procedure differently)
- Special laws in the context of German reunification, which provided specific regulations for certain properties or enterprises.
- In exceptional cases, specific regulations for reconstruction after disasters, provided these were tailored to an individual and identifiable situation.
Regulations in other legal systems
The concept of individual-case law exists in other legal systems as well. For example, in Austrian constitutional law, Art. 7 B-VG (Federal Constitutional Law) stipulates that the enactment of individual-case laws is impermissible unless justified by a special ground. In Switzerland, under Art. 36(1) of the Constitution, a general law is generally required, although some cantons allow special regulations.
Significance and criticism of individual-case law
Individual-case laws are subject to criticism because they can weaken the principle of equality before the law and the separation of powers. They may also become instruments of arbitrariness and political influence. On the other hand, they can be used to address extraordinary, atypical situations, provided that a sufficient objective justification exists and no fundamental rights are restricted.
Selected literature and further references
- BVerfG, 2 BvL 81/86, NJW 1992, 1967 – Individual-case regulation and Art. 19 (1) GG
- Epping/Hillgruber, Basic Law Commentary, Art. 19 and Art. 3 GG
- Sachs, Basic Law, Commentary, Art. 19 marginal no. 13 ff.
- Maurer, Constitutional Law I, 10th edition, p. 433 ff.
Conclusion: The individual-case law is a legally highly significant concept. Its application in the Federal Republic of Germany is subject to strict control by the Basic Law in order to prevent individual special regulations to the detriment of fundamental rights guarantees. Only in exceptional cases and within the framework of objectively justified deviations can an individual-case law be upheld, provided that all constitutional requirements are met.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are individual-case laws subject to special constitutional constraints?
Individual-case laws are subject to special constitutional requirements in German law, as they deviate from the general principle of abstract-general legislation. According to Art. 19 (1) sentence 1 GG, laws restricting fundamental rights must be general and not individual-case regulations. As a result, individual-case laws—especially in the case of burdensome regulations—must strictly comply with the equality principle (Art. 3 (1) GG). A violation of this restriction occurs especially if a law deviates from an existing regulation for a particular single case without objective reason. In addition, the Federal Constitutional Court regularly examines whether an unlawful circumvention of judicial oversight or discrimination exists with individual-case laws. In principle, the legislator may enact individual-case laws if sufficient reasons justify this and the prohibition of arbitrariness is not violated. Nevertheless, individual-case laws are always subject to strict scrutiny of proportionality and must be transparently and objectively justified.
How does an individual-case law differ from a special regulation?
Unlike a special regulation, an individual-case law applies exclusively to one specific case, a single person, institution, or concretely determinable circumstances, whereas a special regulation does cover a small or specific group but is not tailored to only a single case. Special regulations apply to at least an abstract category of cases or persons. The distinction is particularly relevant for constitutional assessment, as individual-case laws are subject to stricter limitations and can be more quickly regarded as arbitrary or as granting privileges/disadvantages. Therefore, individual-case laws are scrutinized particularly closely in legislative procedure and constitutional jurisprudence.
Can individual-case laws be enacted retroactively?
The retroactive application of individual-case laws is legally particularly problematic and generally not permitted. As a rule, the legal prohibition of retroactivity, which derives from Art. 20 (3) GG and the principle of legitimate expectation, prohibits enacting burdensome individual-case laws with retroactive effect. Exceptions are only possible within very narrow limits, for example, when there is no legitimate expectation or the legislator asserts overriding public welfare interests. In contrast, retroactivity may be permissible for beneficial individual-case laws, as long as the rights of third parties are not impaired. Here too, careful constitutional review is essential.
Is judicial review of individual-case laws limited?
No, individual-case laws are subject to full constitutional judicial review, just like other laws. In particular, the Federal Constitutional Court examines whether an individual-case law violates the prohibition of arbitrariness, the principle of equality, or other fundamental rights. Because individual-case laws often require a heightened justification, judicial review in practice is even more intensive here; courts examine not only the formal legislative competence but also whether the law was applied substantively according to the constitution. Unlawful individual-case laws can be declared void by the Federal Constitutional Court.
What are typical examples of individual-case laws in case law?
In previous case law of the Federal Constitutional Court, there are several prominent examples of individual-case laws. A classic example is the so-called “Lex Krupp,” which in 1957, in a single case, transferred company ownership of a certain family in a specific legal form. The “Lex Stinnes” and “Lex Göring” from the past are also examples of laws explicitly directed at individual persons. Such and similar laws have typically been subject to strict scrutiny by the Federal Constitutional Court; the requirements of equality and fundamental constitutional principles must always be met. Today, individual-case laws are rare, as the legislative process now involves high hurdles and requirements for transparency.
In which areas do individual-case laws still exist today?
Individual-case laws are rare in today’s legal practice but continue to be used in certain areas, such as budget law (e.g., in providing funds to individual institutions), civil service or disciplinary law (e.g., in special regulations for officeholders), or for the rehabilitation and compensation of individuals. Individual-case laws may also be enacted in relation to the dissolution of special state relationships (for example, changes of status in specific authorities or bodies). The key is that such laws are always subject to very close constitutional scrutiny and must be extensively justified to avoid violating the prohibition of arbitrariness or the principle of equality.
