Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
2 B 55/18, 2 B 55/18 (2 C 35/18) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2018:221118B2B55.18.0 Generato dall'IA

Justiciability of the Presidium Council’s opinion in federal judge elections versus the procedural bar against isolated review of preliminary decisions

Numero d'incarto 2 B 55/18, 2 B 55/18 (2 C 35/18)
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Accolto (Allowed)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Administrative Court permitted the appeal on the grounds of fundamental legal significance, leaving the lower instance decisions in force pending the resolution of the substantive issues in the appeal proceedings. The dispute concerns a challenge to the independence of the Presidium Council’s opinion issued during the procedure for electing federal judges, specifically whether this opinion is subject to isolated judicial review in the main proceedings or if it is excluded from such review. The decisive legal question, which had not previously been decided by a highest court, is the interplay between the statutory provision requiring the Presidium Council’s opinion in judge elections and the procedural bar against isolated review of preliminary decisions, requiring the clarification of whether the preliminary nature of the opinion precludes direct judicial scrutiny in the main case.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 44a VwGO, § 52 Abs. 2 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 Abs. 3 GKG, § 63 Abs. 1 GKG; Justiciability of the Presidium Council’s opinion in federal judge elections versus the procedural bar against isolated review of preliminary decisions: The dispute concerns a challenge to the independence of the Presidium Council’s opinion issued during the procedure for electing federal judges, specifically whether this opinion is subject to isolated judicial review in the main proceedings or if it is excluded from such review. The decisive legal question, which had not previously been decided by a highest court, is the interplay between the statutory provision requiring the Presidium Council’s opinion in judge elections and the procedural bar against isolated review of preliminary decisions, requiring the clarification of whether the preliminary nature of the opinion precludes direct judicial scrutiny in the main case.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
indipendenza dei giudici perizia giuridica impugnazione di decisioni amministrative controllo della procedura decisione pregiudiziale suffragio diretto

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Basis for granting the appeal due to the fundamental significance of the legal issue.
§ 44a VwGO
1 Satz 1 DRiG im Rahmen des Richterwahlverfahrens abzugebende Stellungnahme des Präsidialrats einer isolierten gerichtlichen Überprüfung im Hauptsacheverfahren zugänglich ist oder ob dem § 44a VwGO entgegensteht.
§ 52 Abs. 2 GKG
Procedural provision applied to determine the amount in dispute for the complaint and appeal proceedings.
§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 Abs. 3 GKG
Basis for the fixation of the amount in dispute in the complaint proceedings.
§ 63 Abs. 1 GKG
Basis for the provisional determination of the amount in dispute for the appeal proceedings.
Generato dall'IA

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

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

Basis for granting the appeal due to the fundamental significance of the legal issue.

§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 Abs. 3 GKG

Basis for the fixation of the amount in dispute in the complaint proceedings.

§ 52 Abs. 2 GKG

Procedural provision applied to determine the amount in dispute for the complaint and appeal proceedings.

§ 63 Abs. 1 GKG

Basis for the provisional determination of the amount in dispute for the appeal 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

Selbstständige Anfechtbarkeit der Stellungnahme des Präsidialrats im Rahmen des Bundesrichterwahlverfahrens; Revisionszulassung

[GRUENDE]

Die Revision wird wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung der Rechtssache zugelassen (§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO).

Das Revisionsverfahren ist zur Klärung der von der Beschwerde aufgeworfenen und bislang höchstrichterlich nicht entschiedenen Frage durchzuführen, ob die nach § 57 Abs. 1 Satz 1 DRiG im Rahmen des Richterwahlverfahrens abzugebende Stellungnahme des Präsidialrats einer isolierten gerichtlichen Überprüfung im Hauptsacheverfahren zugänglich ist oder ob dem § 44a VwGO entgegensteht.

Die Streitwertfestsetzung für das Beschwerdeverfahren folgt aus § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 Abs. 3 und § 52 Abs. 2 GKG. Die vorläufige Festsetzung des Streitwerts für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 63 Abs. 1 i.V.m. § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und § 52 Abs. 2 GKG.