Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
3 B 44/16, 3 B 44/16 (3 C 27/17) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2017:271117B3B44.16.0 Generato dall'IA

Standing to challenge renewed selection decision by non-litigant in initial procedure under Bodenabfertigungsdienst-Verordnung

Numero d'incarto 3 B 44/16, 3 B 44/16 (3 C 27/17)
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 appeals and admitted the revision for review, ruling that the case possesses fundamental significance. The dispute concerns a candidate who failed in a ground handling service selection procedure and challenged a renewed selection decision favoring a rival candidate, having previously omitted to file a direct lawsuit against the initial, judicially annulled selection decision. The court identified the decisive legal issue as the extent to which a non-litigant from the initial procedure retains standing to sue the subsequent selection decision, grounded in Article 132(2) No. 1 of the Code of Administrative Court Procedure (VwGO) regarding the requirement of fundamental significance for revision.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 und 3, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG; Standing to challenge renewed selection decision by non-litigant in initial procedure under Bodenabfertigungsdienst-Verordnung: The dispute concerns a candidate who failed in a ground handling service selection procedure and challenged a renewed selection decision favoring a rival candidate, having previously omitted to file a direct lawsuit against the initial, judicially annulled selection decision. The court identified the decisive legal issue as the extent to which a non-litigant from the initial procedure retains standing to sue the subsequent selection decision, grounded in Article 132(2) No. 1 of the Code of Administrative Court Procedure (VwGO) regarding the requirement of fundamental significance for revision.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
legittimazione a ricorrere impugnazione di decisioni amministrative criteri di selezione motivi di revisione diritti procedurali articolo del CPC

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Cited as the basis for granting the appeal due to the fundamental significance of the case, allowing the revision to proceed.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.
§ 47 Abs. 1 und 3, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Cited as the legal basis for the preliminary determination of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.
Generato dall'IA
2 C 1/18
Beamtenrechtliche Auswahlentscheidung: Aktualitätsanforderungen an Regel- versus Anlassbeurteilungen bei Wechsel der Tätigkeit innerhalb desselben Statusamts
2 BvR 764/11
Beamtenrechtlicher Konkurrentenstreit: Keine schematische Bevorzugung des höheren Statusamts; Kompensierbarkeit des Statusrückstands durch leistungsbezogene Kriterien
2 B 50/17, 2 B 50/17 (2 C 2/18)
Requirement for additional performance appraisal upon significant change in duties to ensure current comparison in selection decisions
2 B 39/19
Damages for violation of statutory selection procedure in public service promotion: fault requirements and forfeiture limits in German administrative law
5 B 15/11
Admission of revision for fundamental significance of resuming administrative compensation proceedings after jurisprudential change

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Cited as the basis for granting the appeal due to the fundamental significance of the case, allowing the revision to proceed.

§ 47 Abs. 1 und 3, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Cited as the legal basis for the preliminary determination of the amount 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; Auswahlverfahren; Klage eines Mitbewerber

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerden haben Erfolg. Der Rechtssache kommt die geltend gemachte grundsätzliche Bedeutung (§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO) zu. Die Revision wird dem Bundesverwaltungsgericht voraussichtlich Gelegenheit geben, unter anderem die Frage zu klären, inwieweit der Teilnehmer an einem Auswahlverfahren nach der Bodenabfertigungsdienst-Verordnung, der gegen die Auswahlentscheidung zugunsten eines Mitbewerbers nicht geklagt hat, nach der gerichtlichen Aufhebung dieser Entscheidung auf die Klage eines anderen Bewerbers gegen die daraufhin ergangene erneute Auswahlentscheidung Klage erheben kann.

Die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1 und 3, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.