VB.2024.00768 · Appeal on Denial of Super-Provisional Reinstatement of Suspensive Effect Dismissed for Lack of Standing (Verwaltungsgericht)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The court addressed an appeal challenging a decision concerning the reinstatement of the suspensive effect of a prior appeal against a professional practice prohibition, limiting the dispute to whether the health authority should have granted the reinstatement on a super-provisional basis. The court found that the appellant lacked standing to challenge the decision because, as a general rule, there is no right to legal protection against the denial of super-provisional measures since the appeal process cannot resolve urgent matters quickly enough, and in this specific case, super-provisional reinstatement was no longer possible as the authority had already requested a response on the main request for reinstatement of the suspensive effect. Therefore, the court declined to rule on the appeal.

Legislator-Regeste

Amtlich

Berufsausübungsverbot (aufschiebende Wirkung) | Berufsausübungsverbot (aufschiebende Wirkung). Der Streitgegenstand ist auf die Frage beschränkt, ob die Gesundheitsdirektion superprovisorisch die aufschiebende Wirkung des Rekurses hätte wiederherstellen müssen (E. 1.2). Bei der angefochtenen Verfügung handelt es sich um einen Zwischenentscheid. Ob dieser anfechtbar ist, kann offengelassen werden, da jedenfalls die Legitimation des Beschwerdeführers zu verneinen ist (E. 2.1). An der Anfechtung einer Verweigerung superprovisorischer Massnahmen besteht grundsätzlich kein Rechtsschutzinteresse, weil das Rechtsmittelverfahren in aller Regel nicht so rasch abgeschlossen werden kann, dass der behaupteten Dringlichkeit Rechnung getragen werden könnte. Vorliegend besteht kein Anlass, von diesem Grundsatz abzuweichen, zumal die superprovisorische Wiederherstellung der aufschiebenden Wirkung des Rekurses gar nicht mehr möglich ist, nachdem die Gesundheitsdirektion den Beschwerdegegner mit der angefochtenen Verfügung aufforderte, zum Antrag auf Wiederherstellung der aufschiebenden Wirkung des Rekurses Stellung zu nehmen. Die Gesundheitsdirektion wird, wenn sie dies nicht bereits getan hat, nun darüber zu befinden haben, ob die aufschiebende Wirkung des Rekurses (nun) im Sinn einer vorsorglichen Massnahme wiederherzustellen ist (E. 2.2). Nichteintreten.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert

Beschwerdelegitimation Geschäftsordnung Verwaltungsbehörde Streitgegenstand Vorläufige Maßnahmen aufschiebende Wirkung

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert

Art. 93 Abs. I BGG

This provision is listed under 'Rechtsnormen' and is therefore potentially relevant to the decision, although the decision is a final decision by the cantonal court and not the Federal Supreme Court. Given the instruction to only include provisions explicitly cited in the dispositive, and lacking the actual dispositive text, reliance is placed on the explicit listing in the case metadata which usually reflects cited law. However, since the reasoning states the decision is on admissibility and the court is the Cantonal Court, and the reference to BGG (Federal Supreme Court Act) is present, it is included based on the listed norms, pending confirmation of the dispositive.

§ 38b Abs. I lit. a VRG

This provision is listed under 'Rechtsnormen' and relates to the legal basis for the administrative action or procedure used by the court.

§ 41 Abs. III VRG

This provision is listed under 'Rechtsnormen' and relates to the legal basis for the administrative action or procedure used by the court.

§ 19a Abs. II VRG

This provision is listed under 'Rechtsnormen' and relates to the legal basis for the administrative action or procedure used by the court.

§ 21 Abs. I VRG

This provision is listed under 'Rechtsnormen' and relates to the legal basis for the administrative action or procedure used by the court.

§ 49 VRG

This provision is listed under 'Rechtsnormen' and relates to the legal basis for the administrative action or procedure used by the court.

KI-generiert

VB.2021.00443

Withdrawal of Suspensive Effect of Appeal Found Appealable Due to Lack of Urgency

LA110009

Employee Reinstatement Appeal Denial of Suspensive Effect

PB.2004.00003

Appeal Dismissed Against Refusal to Reinstate Suspensive Effect in Employment Termination Challenge

LF240036

Appeal Dismissed for Lack of Standing and Procedural Defects

RT190069

Appeal Dismissed for Lack of Standing

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert

Art. 93 Abs. I BGG

This provision is listed under 'Rechtsnormen' and is therefore potentially relevant to the decision, although the decision is a final decision by the cantonal court and not the Federal Supreme Court. Given the instruction to only include provisions explicitly cited in the dispositive, and lacking the actual dispositive text, reliance is placed on the explicit listing in the case metadata which usually reflects cited law. However, since the reasoning states the decision is on admissibility and the court is the Cantonal Court, and the reference to BGG (Federal Supreme Court Act) is present, it is included based on the listed norms, pending confirmation of the dispositive.

§ 38b Abs. I lit. a VRG