Blank reference

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A blank reference (also blanket law, blanket standard or blanket regulation) is a reference in a standard to the factual features or legal consequences of another standard. A distinction is made between a dynamic reference, which refers to the corresponding regulation in its current version, and a static reference, which refers to a law in a specific version (usually by specifying the EU Official Journal or Federal Law Gazette reference).

An example of a dynamic referral is tax evasion in accordance with Section 370 (1 ) AO :

... will be punished who “ provides the tax authorities or other authorities with incorrect or incomplete information about facts relevant for tax purposes ”.

What is a significant tax fact depends on the tax law in the version that is valid at the time of the offense. § 370 AO thus refers "blank" to outside law. The reference is dynamic because the tax law referred to in Section 370 AO changes frequently. With regard to the requirement of certainty , blanket laws in particular are constitutionally controversial if they refer to other provisions with regard to the requirements for criminal liability. A current example is the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court of November 3, 2016, in which Section 10 I, III of the Beef Labeling Act was declared null and void due to the lack of compliance with the requirement of specificity in the case of a dynamic blanket reference to justify criminal liability.


Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ^ BAG , decision of June 23, 1992, Az .: 1 ABR 9/92 on references in a works agreement to the applicable framework collective agreement; BAG, judgment of February 22, 2012 - 4 AZR 8/10 on the dynamic collective bargaining reference to another collective bargaining agreement; Michael Hoffmann, Boris Alles: Note on BAG, ruling from 22.2.2012 - 4 AZR 8/10 (effects of changes in the reference collective agreement on referral collective agreement in the post-operative stage for dynamic blanket references) , in jurisPR-ArbR 32/2012
  2. Jens Bülte : On the criminal liability of concealing sanction claims as sales tax evasion . The decision of the 1st Chamber of the Second Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court of June 16, 2011 (2 BvR 542/09) = HRRS 2011 No. 1128, HRRS November 2011.
  3. BVerfG , decision of February 26, 2003, Az .: 2 BvR 150/03 on the sufficient certainty of § 370 AO
  4. BGH , judgment of July 23, 1992, Az .: 4 StR 194/92 ; Helmut Satzger , Georg Langheld: References in European law in blanket penal laws and their compatibility with the requirement of certainty Comment on BGH, decision of March 17, 2011, 5 StR 543/10 ; HRRS 11/2011, 460
  5. BVerfG, judgment v. November 3, 2016, Az. 2 BvL 1/15