Proper legal remedy for erroneous rejection of asylum application as inadmissible: Anfechtungsklage versus Verpflichtungsklage

The Federal Administrative Court (BVerwG) granted the defendant's complaint and permitted the appeal (Revision) on grounds of fundamental legal significance, leaving the lower instances' substantive rulings pending final review by the Senate. The dispute concerns the appropriate form of legal remedy for a refugee whose asylum application was erroneously rejected as inadmissible by the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF). The key legal question to be resolved is whether such a claimant must proceed via an action for annulment (Anfechtungsklage) or is entitled to seek a declaratory order for refugee status recognition through a compulsory action (Verpflichtungsklage). The court based its decision on § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, finding the issue of sufficient importance to warrant clarification by the full Senate, thereby rendering other pleaded grounds for leave to appeal moot.