Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
2 B 9/18, 2 B 9/18 (2 C 7/18) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2018:020518B2B9.18.0 AI generated

Eligibility of pre-2005 military personnel as transitional beneficiaries under § 98 SVG

Case Number 2 B 9/18, 2 B 9/18 (2 C 7/18)
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Germany (DE)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

In this administrative law proceeding, the Federal Administrative Court granted the defendant's complaint and permitted the plaintiff's appeal for its fundamental legal significance, thereby allowing the case to proceed to a full appellate review. The dispute centers on the interpretation of a transitional provision in the Vocational Training Act (SVG) regarding whether former military personnel who received an admission certificate and transitional benefits before June 1, 2005, qualify as existing beneficiaries under § 98(1) Sentence 1 SVG. The court determined that the legal question is unresolved by the highest courts and disputed among superior administrative courts, necessitating clarification because it affects a significant group of individuals whose certificates were issued prior to the entry into force of the Professional Development and Further Training Act on June 1, 2005, and have not yet been returned or utilized for permanent employment. The decision relies on § 132(2) No. 1 VwGO for granting the appeal and references the Federal Administrative Court's 2015 ruling on the exceptional relevance of transitional provisions, with the dispute value set under the Court Costs Act (GKG).

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 52 Abs. 3 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, Abs. 3 und § 52 Abs. 3 Satz 1 GKG, § 63 Abs. 1 i.V.m. § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und § 52 Abs. 3 Satz 1 GKG; Eligibility of pre-2005 military personnel as transitional beneficiaries under § 98 SVG: The dispute centers on the interpretation of a transitional provision in the Vocational Training Act (SVG) regarding whether former military personnel who received an admission certificate and transitional benefits before June 1, 2005, qualify as existing beneficiaries under § 98(1) Sentence 1 SVG. The court determined that the legal question is unresolved by the highest courts and disputed among superior administrative courts, necessitating clarification because it affects a significant group of individuals whose certificates were issued prior to the entry into force of the Professional Development and Further Training Act on June 1, 2005, and have not yet been returned or utilized for permanent employment. The decision relies on § 132(2) No. 1 VwGO for granting the appeal and references the Federal Administrative Court's 2015 ruling on the exceptional relevance of transitional provisions, with the dispute value set under the Court Costs Act (GKG).

Keywords

AI generated
transitional provisions military personnel training leave prior administrative complaint entry into force administrative personnel

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Main ground for the verdict, justifying the admission of the appeal due to the fundamental legal significance of the case.
§ 52 Abs. 3 Satz 1 GKG
3 und § 52 Abs. 3 Satz 1 GKG.
§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, Abs. 3 und § 52 Abs. 3 Satz 1 GKG
Provisions applied to determine the dispute value for the complaint proceedings.
§ 63 Abs. 1 i.V.m. § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und § 52 Abs. 3 Satz 1 GKG
Provisions applied to determine the preliminary dispute value for the revision proceedings.

Cited Case Law

AI generated
10 A 10387/15
September 2015 - 10 A 10387/15 -).
AI generated
2 C 6/18
Eligibility of former soldiers holding unused admission certificates as existing beneficiaries under SVG transitional rules
2 B 8/18, 2 B 8/18 (2 C 6/18)
Eligibility of former soldiers holding provisional licenses for full transition allowance under SVG transition regulations
2 C 7/18
Transitional allowance for former conscript: classification as "existing beneficiary" under SVG transition rules preserving pre-2005 unlimited return option for unused qualification certificate
2 B 67/11
Soldier’s admission certificate: Extinguishment of rights under § 9(6) SVG upon refusal of reserved post and entitlement to uncut transitional benefits
2 B 10/18
Interpretation of SVG transition provisions: Priority of § 94b Abs. 5 over § 96 Abs. 5 SVG for pre-1999 NATO service periods

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Main ground for the verdict, justifying the admission of the appeal due to the fundamental legal significance of the case.

§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, Abs. 3 und § 52 Abs. 3 Satz 1 GKG

Provisions applied to determine the dispute value for the complaint proceedings.

§ 63 Abs. 1 i.V.m. § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und § 52 Abs. 3 Satz 1 GKG

Provisions applied to determine the preliminary dispute value for the revision proceedings.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Die Beschwerde der Beklagten ist begründet. Die Revision wird wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung der Rechtssache (§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO) zugelassen.

Die von der Beklagten aufgeworfene Frage, ob ehemalige Soldaten, die vor dem 1. Juni 2005 einen Zulassungsschein und hälftige Übergangsbeihilfe erhalten haben, im Sinne der Übergangsregelung des § 98 Abs. 1 Satz 1 SVG als vorhandene Versorgungsempfänger gelten, ist entscheidungserheblich, ist bisher höchstrichterlich nicht geklärt und bedarf im Interesse der Einheitlichkeit der Rechtsprechung der Klärung in einem Revisionsverfahren. Die grundsätzliche Bedeutung der Rechtssache ergibt sich bereits daraus, dass die Auslegung von § 98 Abs. 1 Satz 1 SVG zwischen den Obergerichten umstritten ist (vgl. OVG Koblenz, Beschluss vom 16. September 2015 - 10 A 10387/15 -).

Zwar betrifft die aufgeworfene Frage die Auslegung einer Übergangsregelung. Im Hinblick auf eine solche Bestimmung ist die grundsätzliche Bedeutung der Rechtssache aber ausnahmsweise gegeben, wenn die Beantwortung der Frage für einen nicht überschaubaren Personenkreis in nicht absehbarer Zukunft von Bedeutung ist (BVerwG, Beschluss vom 23. September 2015 - 2 B 73.14 - Buchholz 421.0 Prüfungswesen Nr. 423 Rn. 9). Diese Voraussetzungen sind hier gegeben. Die Auslegung von § 98 Abs. 1 Satz 1 SVG hat Bedeutung für sämtliche Zulassungsscheine, die bis zum Inkrafttreten des Berufsförderungsfortentwicklungsgesetzes vom 4. Mai 2005 (BGBl. I S. 1234) am 1. Juni 2005 erteilt und noch nicht zurückgegeben oder zur Begründung eines dauerhaften Beschäftigungsverhältnisses genutzt worden sind.

Die Streitwertfestsetzung für das Beschwerdeverfahren folgt aus § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, Abs. 3 und § 52 Abs. 3 Satz 1 GKG. Die vorläufige Festsetzung des Streitwerts für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 63 Abs. 1 i.V.m. § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und § 52 Abs. 3 Satz 1 GKG.