Scope of fractional restitution for expropriated company shares with assets in reunification area: object-less beneficiary determination versus specific asset claims
Deutschland (DE)
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Federal Administrative Court granted the defendant's complaint and allowed the revision appeal based on fundamental significance, leaving the prior instance decisions pending further review on the merits. The dispute concerned a restitution claim under the Restitution Act, specifically whether an entitlement to a fractional share of restitution can be established for assets expropriated outside the spatial scope of § 1(6) VermG (German Restitution Act) but belonging to a company located in West Germany with assets in the reunification area. The decisive legal issue, which necessitates the revision, is whether the statute permits an "object-less" determination of the beneficiary's entitlement proportional to the expropriated share, or restricts it to specific, individually reclaimed assets, governed by § 132(2) No. 1 VwGO (Administrative Court Rules of Procedure).
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 GKG, § 52 Abs. 2 GKG; Scope of fractional restitution for expropriated company shares with assets in reunification area: object-less beneficiary determination versus specific asset claims: The dispute concerned a restitution claim under the Restitution Act, specifically whether an entitlement to a fractional share of restitution can be established for assets expropriated outside the spatial scope of § 1(6) VermG (German Restitution Act) but belonging to a company located in West Germany with assets in the reunification area. The decisive legal issue, which necessitates the revision, is whether the statute permits an "object-less" determination of the beneficiary's entitlement proportional to the expropriated share, or restricts it to specific, individually reclaimed assets, governed by § 132(2) No. 1 VwGO (Administrative Court Rules of Procedure).
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertBasis for admitting the revision due to fundamental significance.
Legal basis cited for the provisional determination of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.
Legal basis cited for the provisional determination of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.
Legal basis cited for the provisional determination of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.
Volltext
Revisionszulassung; Bruchteilsrestitutionsberechtigung
[GRUENDE]
Die zulässige Beschwerde der Beklagten ist begründet. Die Revision ist gemäß § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung zuzulassen. Das Revisionsverfahren führt auf die Frage, ob eine Bruchteilsrestitutionsberechtigung wegen einer nicht in den räumlichen Geltungsbereich des § 1 Abs. 6 VermG fallenden Entziehung von Anteilen an einem in Westdeutschland belegenen Unternehmen, dem Vermögensgegenstände im Beitrittsgebiet gehörten, nur bezüglich bestimmter, anteilig zurückverlangter Vermögensgegenstände getroffen werden kann, oder ob das Gesetz auch eine "objektlose" Berechtigtenfeststellung in Höhe der entzogenen Beteiligung zulässt.
Die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1, § 52 Abs. 2, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.