Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
I B 18/10 Generato dall'IA

Effect of insolvency interruption on decisions issued but not yet served

Numero d'incarto I B 18/10
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio annulled
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Court of Finance (BFH) ordered the rescission of a previous ruling that had dismissed a taxpayer's complaint for non-admission of revision, rendering that decision legally void. The dispute arose when the court issued the dismissal on May 20, 2010, prior to the opening of insolvency proceedings against the company on May 27, 2010, but the decision was only served on the representative on July 6, 2010. Under § 240 Sentence 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) in conjunction with § 155 of the Fiscal Courts Act (FGO), the opening of insolvency proceedings automatically interrupts the proceedings, making any subsequent judicial act ineffective pursuant to § 249 No. 2 ZPO; the court held that a decision remains merely an internal matter until announced or served, thus requiring rescission for the sake of legal clarity when issued before the insolvency but communicated afterward.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 249 Abs. 2 ZPO, § 240 Satz 1 ZPO, § 155 FGO; Effect of insolvency interruption on decisions issued but not yet served: The dispute arose when the court issued the dismissal on May 20, 2010, prior to the opening of insolvency proceedings against the company on May 27, 2010, but the decision was only served on the representative on July 6, 2010. Under § 240 Sentence 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) in conjunction with § 155 of the Fiscal Courts Act (FGO), the opening of insolvency proceedings automatically interrupts the proceedings, making any subsequent judicial act ineffective pursuant to § 249 No. 2 ZPO; the court held that a decision remains merely an internal matter until announced or served, thus requiring rescission for the sake of legal clarity when issued before the insolvency but communicated afterward.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
insolvenza revisione di una decisione oggetto della lite apertura della procedura interruzione della prescrizione codice di diritto processuale civile

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 249 Abs. 2 ZPO
Cited in the operative outcome to establish that the previously issued decision is legally void due to the interruption of proceedings by the opening of insolvency.
§ 240 Satz 1 ZPO
Cited in the operative outcome to define the procedural interruption of the case caused by the opening of insolvency proceedings.
§ 155 FGO
Cited in the operative outcome as the connecting norm that applies the civil procedure interruption rules to fiscal court proceedings.

Giurisprudenza citata

Generato dall'IA
VII B 236/02
November 2003 VII B 236/02, BFH/NV 2004, 366, m.w.N.).
BFHE 79, 294
Februar 1964 IV 295/59 S, BFHE 79, 294, BStBl III 1964, 338).
Generato dall'IA
X R 18/16
Voiding of BFH revision judgment due to insolvency interruption and inapplicability of § 249 Abs. 3 ZPO despite waiver of oral hearing
V R 32/12
Effect of insolvency opening on pending tax litigation and persistence of attorney’s mandate after resignation
II ZR 344/17
Judgment on non-admission complaint during insolvency-induced procedural interruption
IX B 36/16
Invalidity of finance court judgment rendered during suspension of proceedings due to insolvency proceedings
IV B 136/08
Insolvency opening invalidates pending tax court judgment requiring rescission for legal clarity

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 249 Abs. 2 ZPO

Cited in the operative outcome to establish that the previously issued decision is legally void due to the interruption of proceedings by the opening of insolvency.

§ 240 Satz 1 ZPO

Cited in the operative outcome to define the procedural interruption of the case caused by the opening of insolvency proceedings.

§ 155 FGO

Cited in the operative outcome as the connecting norm that applies the civil procedure interruption rules to fiscal court proceedings.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Folgen einer Unterbrechung des Verfahrens für Entscheidungen des Gerichts

[LEITSATZ]

NV: Ein Beschluss, der vor Eröffnung des Insolvenzverfahrens von dem erkennenden Gericht gefasst, aber erst nach Eröffnung des Insolvenzverfahrens bekannt gegeben wurde, ist ohne rechtliche Wirkung und aus Gründen der Rechtsklarheit aufzuheben. Vor Verkündung oder Bekanntgabe stellt die Entscheidung nur eine innere Angelegenheit des Gerichts dar .

[TATBESTAND]

I. Über das Vermögen der X-GmbH ist durch Beschluss des Amtsgerichts … am 27. Mai 2010 das Insolvenzverfahren eröffnet und der Beschwerdeführer zum Insolvenzverwalter bestellt worden. Zuvor hatte das Finanzgericht eine Klage der X-GmbH abgewiesen. Mit Beschluss vom 20. Mai 2010 hat der Senat die Beschwerde der X-GmbH wegen Nichtzulassung der Revision als unzulässig verworfen. Der Beschluss wurde, da die Insolvenz der X-GmbH dem erkennenden Senat nicht bekannt war, am 6. Juli 2010 der ehemaligen Prozessbevollmächtigten der X-GmbH übersandt.

[ENTSCHEIDUNGSGRUENDE]

II. Durch die Eröffnung des Insolvenzverfahrens über das Vermögen der X-GmbH ist das Verfahren wegen der Nichtzulassungsbeschwerde gemäß § 240 Satz 1 der Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO) i.V.m. § 155 der Finanzgerichtsordnung unterbrochen worden. Der in der Folge ergangene Beschluss des Senats ist daher unwirksam (§ 249 Abs. 2 ZPO) und aus Gründen der Rechtsklarheit aufzuheben (vgl. Bundesfinanzhof --BFH--, Beschluss vom 27. November 2003 VII B 236/02, BFH/NV 2004, 366, m.w.N.). Der Senat hat den Beschluss zwar bereits am 20. Mai 2010, demnach vor Eröffnung des Insolvenzverfahrens, gefasst. Vor Verkündung oder Bekanntgabe stellte die Entscheidung jedoch nur eine innere Angelegenheit des Gerichts dar (BFH-Beschluss vom 21. Februar 1964 IV 295/59 S, BFHE 79, 294, BStBl III 1964, 338).