The complainant, who was born out of wedlock in 1950, assumes that the respondent in the initial proceedings (hereinafter: the respondent) is her biological father. In 1954, the complainant took legal action against the respondent, seeking “establishment of natural parentage” (“Feststellung blutsmäßiger Abstammung ”) according to the law applicable at that time. The Regional Court’s (Landgericht ) decision dismissing that action in 1955 became final. In 2009, the complainant requested the respondent to consent to a DNA test “to conclusively determine” paternity. The respondent, however, refused. Subsequently, in the initial proceedings, the complainant – relying on §°1598a BGB – requested the respondent to consent to a genetic parentage test and to acquiesce in the taking of a genetic sample appropriate for that test. §°1598a BGB provides such a right for the father, the mother, and the child within a legal family vis-à-vis the respective other two members of that family. According to the complainant, §°1598a BGB should be interpreted in conformity with the Basic Law and human rights (verfassungs- und menschenrechtskonforme Auslegung ) in the sense that also the respondent, as the putative biological but not legal father, could be requested to participate in proceedings aimed at determining parentage without changing the legal status of the persons involved (rechtsfolgenlose Abstammungsklärung ). The Local Court (Amtsgericht ) held that provision to be inapplicable and rejected the complainant’s action. The complaint lodged against that decision before the Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht ) was unsuccessful.