Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
9 BN 4/13, 9 BN 4/13 (9 CN 1/14) KI-generiert

Admissibility of revision to develop jurisprudence on binding effect of land readjustment plan determinations

Geschäftsnummer 9 BN 4/13, 9 BN 4/13 (9 CN 1/14)
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Deutschland (DE)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Gutgeheissen (Allowed)
Originalquelle öffnen Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The Federal Administrative Court (BVerwG) admitted the appeal on points of law in favor of the applicants, ruling that their complaint was admissible and well-founded because the case possessed fundamental legal significance. The dispute concerned the binding legal effect of specific determinations made within a land readjustment plan (Flurbereinigungsplan) under German agricultural law. The court based its decision on § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, granting leave to appeal to allow the BVerwG to develop its jurisprudence regarding § 58 Abs. 4 of the Land Readjustment Act (FlurbG), while the provisional amount in controversy for the proceedings was established pursuant to §§ 47, 52, and 63 GKG.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 52 Abs. 2 GKG; Admissibility of revision to develop jurisprudence on binding effect of land readjustment plan determinations: The dispute concerned the binding legal effect of specific determinations made within a land readjustment plan (Flurbereinigungsplan) under German agricultural law. The court based its decision on § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, granting leave to appeal to allow the BVerwG to develop its jurisprudence regarding § 58 Abs. 4 of the Land Readjustment Act (FlurbG), while the provisional amount in controversy for the proceedings was established pursuant to §§ 47, 52, and 63 GKG.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Bodenrecht Revisionsverfahren landwirtschaftliches Grundstück Nutzungsplanrevision Verwaltungsbeschwerde Wirkungen der Vorabentscheidungsurteile

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Grounds for the admission of the revision due to the case's fundamental legal significance.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Provision cited for the provisional calculation of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.
§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Provision cited for the provisional calculation of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.
§ 52 Abs. 2 GKG
Provision cited for the provisional calculation of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.
KI-generiert
9 B 44/19
Invalidity of land readjustment settlement due to hidden dissent or revocable error and objective interpretation of plan amendments
8 B 23/23
Land readjustment allocation finality and right to property when prior individual challenges were settled
9 B 88/09
Land readjustment: modification of farm and building plots under § 45 Abs. 1 Satz 1 Nr. 1 FlurbG to align legal boundaries with actual possession
9 B 43/19
Judicial settlement in land readjustment: immediate plan amendment via land waiver versus conditional obligation and revocation for error
4 BN 46/21
Substantive effect of textual amendments to draft land-use plans: Mandatory re-consultation under § 4a Abs. 3 BauGB depends on regulatory content, not timing or pending litigation

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Grounds for the admission of the revision due to the case's fundamental legal significance.

§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Provision cited for the provisional calculation of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.

§ 52 Abs. 2 GKG

Provision cited for the provisional calculation of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.

§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Provision cited for the provisional calculation of the amount in dispute for the revision 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; Festsetzungen im Flurbereinigungsplan

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerde der Antragsteller ist zulässig und begründet. Die Revision ist gemäß § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung zuzulassen. Sie kann dem Bundesverwaltungsgericht Gelegenheit geben, seine Rechtsprechung zu § 58 Abs. 4 FlurbG fortzuentwickeln.

Die vorläufige Festsetzung des Streitwertes für das Revisionsverfahren folgt aus § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 2, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.