Admissibility of revision to clarify remuneration standards for procedural representatives under § 119 Abs. 3 FlurbG
Deutschland (DE)
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Federal Administrative Court allowed the defendant's appeal, granting leave for a revision proceeding to address the unresolved legal standard for remuneration of procedural representatives in land consolidation cases. The dispute concerned the interpretation of § 119 Abs. 3 of the Land Consolidation Act (FlurbG), specifically regarding the criteria for calculating fees for representatives in these proceedings. The court determined that the issue possesses fundamental significance as it has not previously been clarified by the Federal Administrative Court, and it fixed the provisional value in dispute for the revision instance pursuant to §§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, 52 Abs. 3, and 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 of the Court Costs Act (GKG).
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG; Admissibility of revision to clarify remuneration standards for procedural representatives under § 119 Abs. 3 FlurbG: The dispute concerned the interpretation of § 119 Abs. 3 of the Land Consolidation Act (FlurbG), specifically regarding the criteria for calculating fees for representatives in these proceedings. The court determined that the issue possesses fundamental significance as it has not previously been clarified by the Federal Administrative Court, and it fixed the provisional value in dispute for the revision instance pursuant to §§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, 52 Abs. 3, and 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 of the Court Costs Act (GKG).
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertMain ground for the verdict, as it justifies the allowance of the revision appeal due to the fundamental significance of the legal question.
Procedural basis cited in the dispositive for the provisional determination of the amount in dispute for the revision proceeding.
Volltext
Revisionszulassung; Vergütung des Verfahrensvertreters nach § 119 Abs. 3 FlurbG
[GRUENDE]
Die Beschwerde des Beklagten ist zulässig und begründet. Die Revision ist gemäß § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung zuzulassen. Sie kann dem Senat Gelegenheit geben, über den vom Bundesverwaltungsgericht bisher nicht geklärten Maßstab für die Vergütung des Verfahrensvertreters gemäß § 119 Abs. 3 FlurbG zu entscheiden.
Die vorläufige Festsetzung des Streitwertes für das Revisionsverfahren folgt aus § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.