Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
9 B 60/16, 9 B 60/16 (9 C 1/17) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2017:040517B9B60.16.0 Généré par l'IA

Foreseeability of future road network developments in traffic forecasts for road planning

Numéro de cause 9 B 60/16, 9 B 60/16 (9 C 1/17)
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Allemagne (DE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Admis (Allowed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The Federal Administrative Court ordered the admission of an appeal on points of law, ruling that the defendant’s complaint against the lower court’s partial grant of relief was both admissible and well-founded; consequently, the appeal will proceed to the Federal Administrative Court to clarify the legal standard for when future developments in the road network are foreseeable and must be considered in traffic forecasts for planned roads. The dispute concerned a legal challenge to a road planning decision, specifically the assessment of traffic prognoses in the context of infrastructure development. The decision is grounded in § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 of the Administrative Court Code (VwGO), which mandates the admission of an appeal where the case involves a question of fundamental legal significance, and the preliminary determination of the amount in dispute follows §§ 47, 52, and 63 of the Court Costs Act (GKG).

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 1, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG; Foreseeability of future road network developments in traffic forecasts for road planning: The dispute concerned a legal challenge to a road planning decision, specifically the assessment of traffic prognoses in the context of infrastructure development. The decision is grounded in § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 of the Administrative Court Code (VwGO), which mandates the admission of an appeal where the case involves a question of fundamental legal significance, and the preliminary determination of the amount in dispute follows §§ 47, 52, and 63 of the Court Costs Act (GKG).

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
construction de routes droit de la circulation routière décision préjudicielle recours contre des décisions administratives frais d'élaboration des plans autorisation partielle

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Primary legal basis for admitting the appeal on points of law due to the fundamental significance of the legal question.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
1, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.
§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 1, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Provisions cited for the preliminary determination of the amount in dispute in the appeal proceedings.
Généré par l'IA
9 B 30/12
Road project plan justification: sufficiency of model-based traffic forecasts versus current counts and necessity of pedestrian safety
9 A 20/08
Autobahn A 44 Planfeststellung: Traffic forecast validity and art conservation exception for offset location selection
7 A 10/19
Plan approval for railway expansion: scope of alternative route review under statutory need plans and admissibility of unexposed traffic forecasts
7 B 46/10
Admission of revision in planning approval: judicial control of post-decision demand forecasts and balancing defects regarding interdependent infrastructure projects
7 B 47/10
Admissibility of revision against plan approval: sufficiency of party demand forecasts and scope of judicial review of post-procedural standardized evaluations

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Primary legal basis for admitting the appeal on points of law due to the fundamental significance of the legal question.

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

Provisions cited for the preliminary determination of the amount in dispute in the appeal proceedings.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet

Revisionszulassung; Verkehrsprognose bei Straßenplanung

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerde des Beklagten, mit der er die Zulassung der Revision begehrt, soweit die Klage nicht bereits abgewiesen worden ist, ist zulässig und begründet. Die Revision ist gemäß § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung der Rechtssache zuzulassen. Sie kann dem Bundesverwaltungsgericht Gelegenheit geben zur weiteren Klärung der Frage, ab wann zukünftige Entwicklungen im Straßennetz als vorhersehbar anzusehen und deshalb bei der Verkehrsprognose für eine geplante Straße zu berücksichtigen sind.

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