Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
8 B 48/16, 8 B 48/16 (8 C 2/17) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2017:190117B8B48.16.0 KI-generiert

Prerequisites for fractional restitution of expropriated corporate shares under § 3 Abs. 1 Satz 4 Halbs. 2 VermG

Geschäftsnummer 8 B 48/16, 8 B 48/16 (8 C 2/17)
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Deutschland (DE)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Gutgeheissen (Allowed)
Originalquelle öffnen Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The Federal Administrative Court (BVerwG) granted the defendant's complaint and admitted a revision appeal on grounds of fundamental legal significance, while also fixing the preliminary amount in dispute for the subsequent proceedings. The case concerns a dispute over the prerequisites for fractional restitution (Bruchteilsrestitution) of property interests, specifically whether an claim for the return of shares or assets expropriated due to political persecution in entities located outside the territory of the former German Democratic Republic is legally dependent on compensation having been provided under a law enacted after May 8, 1945. The decisive legal basis is § 3 Abs. 1 Satz 4 Halbs. 2 of the German Property Act (VermG) and § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, which the court identified as requiring clarification on the conditions for restitution in cross-border contexts involving pre-reunification expropriation.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 GKG, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG; Prerequisites for fractional restitution of expropriated corporate shares under § 3 Abs. 1 Satz 4 Halbs. 2 VermG: The case concerns a dispute over the prerequisites for fractional restitution (Bruchteilsrestitution) of property interests, specifically whether an claim for the return of shares or assets expropriated due to political persecution in entities located outside the territory of the former German Democratic Republic is legally dependent on compensation having been provided under a law enacted after May 8, 1945. The decisive legal basis is § 3 Abs. 1 Satz 4 Halbs. 2 of the German Property Act (VermG) and § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, which the court identified as requiring clarification on the conditions for restitution in cross-border contexts involving pre-reunification expropriation.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Rückübertragung des enteigneten Eigentums juristische Person Revisionsgründe Vermögen Verlust der Rechte des Gesellschafters Vorverfahren

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Main ground for the verdict, as the court explicitly ordered the admission of the revision based on fundamental legal significance under this provision.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Procedural provision cited in the second order for the preliminary determination of the amount in dispute.
§ 47 Abs. 1 GKG
Procedural provision cited in the second order for the preliminary determination of the amount in dispute.
§ 52 Abs. 1 GKG
Procedural provision cited in the second order for the preliminary determination of the amount in dispute.
KI-generiert
8 C 10/16
Prerequisite of prior restitution for fractional restitution claims based on expropriation of Western shareholdings in holding companies with assets in the accession area
8 B 106/09
Standing for fractional restitution of corporate shares under § 3 Abs. 1 Satz 5 VermG and rebuttal of the expropriation presumption
8 B 33/16, 8 B 33/16 (8 C 1/17)
Eligibility for fractional restitution of foreign-listed shares under the Act on the Removal of the Consequences of National Socialist Persecution
8 B 68/16, 8 B 68/16 (8 C 10/17)
Scope of fractional restitution for expropriated company shares with assets in reunification area: object-less beneficiary determination versus specific asset claims
8 B 1/15
Extent of fractional restitution under the Property Restoration Act for post-expropriation acquisitions by the expropriated entity

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Main ground for the verdict, as the court explicitly ordered the admission of the revision based on fundamental legal significance under this provision.

§ 47 Abs. 1 GKG

Procedural provision cited in the second order for the preliminary determination of the amount in dispute.

§ 52 Abs. 1 GKG

Procedural provision cited in the second order for the preliminary determination of the amount in dispute.

§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Procedural provision cited in the second order for the preliminary determination of the amount in dispute.

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

Revisionszulassung; Voraussetzungen der Bruchteilsrestitution

[GRUENDE]

Die zulässige Beschwerde der Beklagten ist begründet. Die Revision ist gemäß § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung zuzulassen. Das Revisionsverfahren bietet voraussichtlich Gelegenheit, die Voraussetzungen einer Bruchteilsrestitution nach § 3 Abs. 1 Satz 4 Halbs. 2 VermG näher zu präzisieren und insbesondere zu klären, ob ein Anspruch auf Bruchteilsrestitution wegen verfolgungsbedingt entzogener Anteile an Unternehmen mit Sitz außerhalb des Beitrittsgebiets davon abhängig ist, dass die Rückerstattung nach "einem anderen nach dem 8. Mai 1945 ergangenen Gesetz" (vgl. § 3 Abs. 1 Satz 4 Halbs. 2 VermG) erfolgt ist.

Die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1, § 52 Abs. 1, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.