Thursday, August 20, 2009

Watch Monica Roccaforte Movies Online

of inadmissibility against detention costs in order custody review

When Andrew in December 2007 after a hearing, the rule of law principles, scoffed at the announcement of the appeal did not raise, grabbed judge Ronsdorf still one on top : 100 EUR administrative fine, failing that, two days in jail.

Andreas did not pay, but sat . And now got a week ago, a bill - a detention fee of 24.88 EUR. Alone - there is no legal basis for the imposition of a detention costs contribution. After all, who does not required to work is (§ 175 of the Prison Act - "- way, safety, forced and forcing enforcement of of order" in the section), does not pay ( § 50 para 1 sentence 2 No. 3 Prison Act ) .

After it has now been tried so illegally, 240 EUR recover in time for a revision withdrawn, we are with this detention fee calculation in the second cost method. Against this bill, we have the appeal of memory inserted .

it is exciting that again does not correct the prosecutor and decide their own incorrect billing the district court must (as in the auditing costs thing) or whether it is a bit easier this time. The case should go back to the AG Zittau for decision, it would then probably again RIAG Ronsdorf of it - really - would have to decide, however, the challenge procedure complaint was still pending against him from LG Görlitz.

Watch Monica Roccaforte Movies Online

of inadmissibility against detention costs in order custody review

When Andrew in December 2007 after a hearing, the rule of law principles, scoffed at the announcement of the appeal did not raise, grabbed judge Ronsdorf still one on top : 100 EUR administrative fine, failing that, two days in jail.

Andreas did not pay, but sat . And now got a week ago, a bill - a detention fee of 24.88 EUR. Alone - there is no legal basis for the imposition of a detention costs contribution. After all, who does not required to work is (§ 175 of the Prison Act - "- way, safety, forced and forcing enforcement of of order" in the section), does not pay ( § 50 para 1 sentence 2 No. 3 Prison Act ) .

After it has now been tried so illegally, 240 EUR recover in time for a revision withdrawn, we are with this detention fee calculation in the second cost method. Against this bill, we have the appeal of memory inserted .

it is exciting that again does not correct the prosecutor and decide their own incorrect billing the district court must (as in the auditing costs thing) or whether it is a bit easier this time. The case should go back to the AG Zittau for decision, it would then probably again RIAG Ronsdorf of it - really - would have to decide, however, the challenge procedure complaint was still pending against him from LG Görlitz.