Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
4 BN 52/21, 4 BN 52/21 (4 CN 6/22) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2022:121022B4BN52.21.0 AI generated

Leave to appeal on fundamental significance: relationship between regional planning and project-related development plans under § 12 Abs. 5 Satz 2 ROG 2008

Case Number 4 BN 52/21, 4 BN 52/21 (4 CN 6/22)
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Germany (DE)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Federal Administrative Court of Germany (4th Senate) upheld the appeals by the respondent and the joined party, reversing the Higher Administrative Court’s refusal to allow an appeal to the Federal Court and explicitly permitting the revision proceedings, with the final cost determination reserved for the concluding judgment. The dispute concerns regional planning law, specifically the legal relationship between regional planning instruments and project-related detailed development plans, including the requirements for regional location determinations and the statutory hints under § 12 Abs. 5 Satz 2 of the 2008 Regional Planning Act. The decisive legal basis for this procedural order is § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, which grants leave to appeal based on the fundamental significance of the legal issue, allowing the Federal Court to establish jurisprudence on these planning law matters.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG; Leave to appeal on fundamental significance: relationship between regional planning and project-related development plans under § 12 Abs. 5 Satz 2 ROG 2008: The dispute concerns regional planning law, specifically the legal relationship between regional planning instruments and project-related detailed development plans, including the requirements for regional location determinations and the statutory hints under § 12 Abs. 5 Satz 2 of the 2008 Regional Planning Act. The decisive legal basis for this procedural order is § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, which grants leave to appeal based on the fundamental significance of the legal issue, allowing the Federal Court to establish jurisprudence on these planning law matters.

Keywords

AI generated
regional development regional law detailed development plan planning costs related proceedings procedural revision

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Main ground for allowing the revision due to the fundamental significance of the legal issue regarding regional planning and project-related development plans.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.
§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Basis for the provisional determination of the value in dispute for the revision proceedings.
AI generated
4 BN 50/21, 4 BN 50/21 (4 CN 4/22)
Admission of revision on relation between regional planning and project-specific development plans and site designation requirements under § 12 Abs. 5 ROG
4 BN 51/21, 4 BN 51/21 (4 CN 5/22)
Regional planning vs. project-based development plan: compatibility and requirements for site allocation under § 12(5) Sentence 2 ROG
4 CN 2/22
Antragsbefugnis in der Normenkontrolle: Keine Abwägungsrelevanz für bebaute Grundstücke im Regionalen Grünzug bei funktionaler, nicht flächenscharfer Zielfestlegung
4 BN 20.25, 4 BN 20.25 (4 CN 2.26)
Relationship between spatial planning law and specialized administrative law in authorizing target deviations for development measures
4 BN 3/16, 4 BN 3/16 (4 CN 3/17)
Revisionszulassung: Bodenrechtliche Relevanz der Kosten- und Finanzierungsübersicht bei der Sanierungsbeschlussfassung

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Main ground for allowing the revision due to the fundamental significance of the legal issue regarding regional planning and project-related development plans.

§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Basis for the provisional determination of the value in dispute 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

Revisionszulassung; Regionalplanung

[TENOR]

Auf die Beschwerden der Antragsgegnerin und der Beigeladenen zu 1 wird die Entscheidung des Oberverwaltungsgerichts für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen über die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Urteil vom 26. August 2021 aufgehoben.

Die Revisionen werden zugelassen.

Die Kostenentscheidung bleibt der Schlussentscheidung vorbehalten.

Der Wert des Streitgegenstandes wird für das Revisionsverfahren vorläufig auf 60 000 € festgesetzt.

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerden sind begründet. Die Revisionen sind wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung der Rechtssache nach § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO zuzulassen. Das Revisionsverfahren kann dem Senat voraussichtlich Gelegenheit geben, sich zur Frage des Verhältnisses von Regionalplanung und vorhabenbezogenem Bebauungsplan sowie zu den Anforderungen an eine regionalplanerische Standortfestlegung und an den Hinweis nach § 12 Abs. 5 Satz 2 ROG 2008 zu äußern.

Die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung im Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.