Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
7 B 29/18, 7 B 29/18 (7 C 5/19) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2019:260619B7B29.18.0 KI-generiert

Admissibility of appeal based on fundamental significance of determining when Freedom of Information Act requests constitute abuse of rights

Geschäftsnummer 7 B 29/18, 7 B 29/18 (7 C 5/19)
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 an appeal on points of law to the same court, ruling that the case has fundamental legal significance. The dispute concerns a challenge to the permissibility of information access requests under the Federal Freedom of Information Act (IFG), specifically addressing whether such requests can constitute an abuse of rights (*Rechtsmissbrauch*). The decisive legal basis for the admission is § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, which allows for appeal when a case clarifies a fundamental question of law; here, the court determined that it can clarify the conditions under which IFG requests are abusive, while the dispute value was set according to §§ 47, 52, and 63 GKG.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 52 Abs. 2 GKG, § 63 Abs. 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 3 GKG; Admissibility of appeal based on fundamental significance of determining when Freedom of Information Act requests constitute abuse of rights: The dispute concerns a challenge to the permissibility of information access requests under the Federal Freedom of Information Act (IFG), specifically addressing whether such requests can constitute an abuse of rights (*Rechtsmissbrauch*). The decisive legal basis for the admission is § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, which allows for appeal when a case clarifies a fundamental question of law; here, the court determined that it can clarify the conditions under which IFG requests are abusive, while the dispute value was set according to §§ 47, 52, and 63 GKG.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Zugang zu amtlichen Dokumenten Verfahrensrechte Grundrechte Anfechtung von Verwaltungsverfügungen Streitwert Rechtsstaat
KI-generiert
WBRE201500070
Admissibility of revision on the exclusion grounds and scope of application of the Freedom of Information Act (IFG)
WBRE202100171
IFG information access: abuse of rights exception and non-attribution of counsel’s out-of-scope mass-litigation conduct
WBRE410019423
Freedom of Information Act access to collegiate body minutes: decision-relevance prerequisite for intermediate proceedings on evidentiary access.
WBRE202300139
Insufficiency of reasoning for refusing BVerfSchG information request due to risk of source endangerment and operational exposure.
WBRE202100170
Information freedom access claim: abuse of rights defense and imputation of attorney’s mass-litigation conduct to client

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Main ground for the admission of the appeal on points of law, citing fundamental significance.

§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Procedural rule applied in the dispositive for the determination of the dispute value in the complaint and appeal proceedings.

§ 47 Abs. 3 GKG

Procedural rule applied in the dispositive for the determination of the dispute value in the complaint proceedings.

§ 52 Abs. 2 GKG

Cost provision cited in the dispositive for the determination of the dispute value in both proceedings.

§ 63 Abs. 1 GKG

Cost provision cited in the dispositive for the determination of the dispute value in the appeal proceedings.

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; Rechtsmissbrauch von Anträgen auf Informationszugang nach dem Informationsfreiheitsgesetz des Bundes (IFG)

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerde der Beklagten ist begründet. Die Rechtssache hat grundsätzliche Bedeutung im Sinne des § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO.

Das Verfahren kann dem Senat voraussichtlich Gelegenheit zur Klärung der Frage geben, unter welchen Voraussetzungen Anträge auf Informationszugang nach dem Informationsfreiheitsgesetz des Bundes (IFG) rechtsmissbräuchlich sein können.

Die Festsetzung des Streitwerts beruht für das Beschwerdeverfahren auf § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und Abs. 3, § 52 Abs. 2 GKG, für das Revisionsverfahren auf § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 2, § 63 Abs. 1 GKG.