Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
4 B 5/17, 4 B 5/17 (4 C 4/17) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2017:260617B4B5.17.0 Generato dall'IA

Tension between planning maintenance obligations for completed projects and individual claims under § 4 Abs. 1 Satz 1 UmwRG

Numero d'incarto 4 B 5/17, 4 B 5/17 (4 C 4/17)
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Accolto (Allowed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Administrative Court granted the complaint against the lower court's refusal to allow the appeal, thereby admitting revision on grounds of fundamental legal significance, and set the value in dispute for the ensuing proceedings. The case concerns a dispute under environmental protection law regarding the relationship between planning maintenance requirements for an already completed, project-approved undertaking and the individual rights asserted under § 4(1) Sentence 1 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (UmwRG). The decisive legal basis involves the admissibility of revision under § 132(1) and § 132(2) No. 1 of the Administrative Court Procedure Act (VwGO), focusing on whether the revision can clarify the interaction between planning law maintenance provisions and statutory environmental protection claims.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 133 Abs. 1 VwGO, § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 132 Abs. 1 VwGO, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG; Tension between planning maintenance obligations for completed projects and individual claims under § 4 Abs. 1 Satz 1 UmwRG: The case concerns a dispute under environmental protection law regarding the relationship between planning maintenance requirements for an already completed, project-approved undertaking and the individual rights asserted under § 4(1) Sentence 1 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (UmwRG). The decisive legal basis involves the admissibility of revision under § 132(1) and § 132(2) No. 1 of the Administrative Court Procedure Act (VwGO), focusing on whether the revision can clarify the interaction between planning law maintenance provisions and statutory environmental protection claims.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
obbligazioni alimentari presupposti materiali presupposti legali procedura di pianificazione motivi di revisione considerazioni di protezione ambientale

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 133 Abs. 1 VwGO
Procedural basis cited in the operative order to establish the admissibility of the complaint challenging the refusal of leave to appeal.
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Substantive legal ground cited in the operative order for granting leave to appeal on the basis of the fundamental significance of the legal issue.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Provision cited for the calculation of the value in dispute for the revision proceedings.
§ 132 Abs. 1 VwGO
Procedural basis cited in the operative order to establish the admissibility of the complaint challenging the refusal of leave to appeal.
§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Provision cited for the calculation of the value in dispute for the revision proceedings.
§ 52 Abs. 1 GKG
Provision cited for the calculation of the value in dispute for the revision proceedings.
Generato dall'IA
4 B 4/17, 4 B 4/17 (4 C 3/17)
Interplay between planning maintenance provisions for completed projects and substantive claims under the Federal Environmental Impact Assessment Act in revision admissibility proceedings
9 B 7/22
Admissibility of revision against road planning approval: scope of environmental access to justice statute and strict ten-week briefing deadline
4 BN 21/17
Antragsbefugnis in der Normenkontrolle bei bauleitplanerischer Abwägung und Flächennutzung nach § 50 BImSchG
9 VR 5/13
Sachliche Zuständigkeit des BVerwG für fernstraßenrechtliche Planfeststellungsstreitigkeiten: Abgrenzung zwischen Genehmigungsverfahren und Vollziehung eines bestandskräftigen Planfeststellungsbeschlusses
7 B 3/20, 7 B 3/20 (7 C 1/21)
Revisionszulassung: Verhältnis zwischen bergrechtlichem Sonderbetriebsplan und wasserrechtlicher Zulassung

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 132 Abs. 1 VwGO

Procedural basis cited in the operative order to establish the admissibility of the complaint challenging the refusal of leave to appeal.

§ 133 Abs. 1 VwGO

Procedural basis cited in the operative order to establish the admissibility of the complaint challenging the refusal of leave to appeal.

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Substantive legal ground cited in the operative order for granting leave to appeal on the basis of the fundamental significance of the legal issue.

§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Provision cited for the calculation of the value in dispute for the revision proceedings.

§ 52 Abs. 1 GKG

Provision cited for the calculation of the value in dispute for the revision proceedings.

§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Provision cited for the calculation of the value in dispute for the revision 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

Revisionszulassung; Grundsatz der Planerhaltung bei bereits errichtetem Vorhaben

[GRUENDE]

Die nach § 132 Abs. 1, § 133 Abs. 1 VwGO zulässige Beschwerde ist begründet. Die Revision ist wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung der Rechtssache nach § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO zuzulassen. Das Revisionsverfahren kann voraussichtlich zur Klärung der Frage beitragen, in welchem Verhältnis die planfeststellungsrechtlichen Vorschriften über die Planerhaltung zu dem Anspruch aus § 4 Abs. 1 Satz 1 UmwRG stehen, wenn das planfestgestellte Vorhaben bereits errichtet ist.

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