Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
1 C 29/22, 1 C 29/22 (1 C 43/20) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2022:111022B1C29.22.0 Generato dall'IA

Asylum case resolution: Cost allocation after mutual declaration of settlement and effect on prior judgment

Numero d'incarto 1 C 29/22, 1 C 29/22 (1 C 43/20)
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio struck_off
Spese processuali a carico dell'autorità / Stato
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Administrative Court ordered the discontinuance of the revision proceedings and declared the lower court’s judgment from July 21, 2020, void, while ordering the defendant to bear all legal costs across all instances. The dispute concerned an inadmissible asylum application, which was rendered moot because the parties agreed that the matter was settled following the defendant’s unilateral act of placing the claimant’s position beyond effective challenge. The court applied the corresponding provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure via the Administrative Court Procedure Act to discontinue the case based on the agreed settlement and utilized equitable discretion to allocate costs to the party responsible for the event that rendered the lawsuit moot. No court fees were collected in accordance with the Asylum Act, and the subject matter value was determined under the Legal Services Act without deviation.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 125 Abs. 1 Satz 1 VwGO, § 173 Satz 1 VwGO, § 269 Abs. 3 Satz 1 ZPO, § 161 Abs. 2 Satz 1 VwGO, § 31 AsylG, § 83b AsylG; Asylum case resolution: Cost allocation after mutual declaration of settlement and effect on prior judgment: The dispute concerned an inadmissible asylum application, which was rendered moot because the parties agreed that the matter was settled following the defendant’s unilateral act of placing the claimant’s position beyond effective challenge. The court applied the corresponding provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure via the Administrative Court Procedure Act to discontinue the case based on the agreed settlement and utilized equitable discretion to allocate costs to the party responsible for the event that rendered the lawsuit moot. No court fees were collected in accordance with the Asylum Act, and the subject matter value was determined under the Legal Services Act without deviation.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
procedura d'asilo revisione di una decisione fine del processo spese amministrative ripartizione delle spese codice di diritto processuale civile

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 125 Abs. 1 Satz 1 VwGO
§ 141 Satz 1 und § 125 Abs. 1 Satz 1 VwGO einzustellen.
§ 173 Satz 1 VwGO
Gemäß § 173 Satz 1 VwGO i.
§ 269 Abs. 3 Satz 1 ZPO
einer entsprechenden Anwendung des § 269 Abs. 3 Satz 1 ZPO ist die Entscheidung der Vorinstanz wirkungslos.
§ 161 Abs. 2 Satz 1 VwGO
Über die Kosten des Verfahrens in allen Instanzen ist nach § 161 Abs. 2 Satz 1 VwGO unter Berücksichtigung des bisherigen Sach- und Streitstandes nach billigem Ermessen zu entscheiden.
§ 31 AsylG
April 2017 - 1 C 9.16 - Buchholz 402.251 § 31 AsylG Nr.
§ 83b AsylG
Provision applied in the dispositive to order that no court fees are collected.
§ 30 Abs. 1 Satz 1 RVG
Provision applied in the dispositive to determine the subject matter value of the case.
§ 30 Abs. 2 RVG
Gründe für eine Abweichung gemäß § 30 Abs. 2 RVG liegen nicht vor.
Generato dall'IA
10 C 1/10
Cost allocation and procedural dismissal of revocation proceedings for refugee recognition due to naturalization and mootness
2 BvR 1204/19
Reimbursement of constitutional complaint costs after declaration of mootness due to voluntary suspension of deportation order
2 BvR 2160/17
Reimbursement of costs in constitutional complaint following grant of legal aid in asylum proceedings
8 C 15/08
Withdrawal of administrative action pursuant to extrajudicial settlement and nullity of prior judgments
VII ZR 254/14
Cost allocation for mutually declared moot revision-stage litigation and inadmissibility of complaint dismissal before expiration of reasoning deadline

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 83b AsylG

Provision applied in the dispositive to order that no court fees are collected.

§ 30 Abs. 1 Satz 1 RVG

Provision applied in the dispositive to determine the subject matter value of the case.

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

Kostenentscheidung nach Hauptsachenerledigung; unzulässiger Asylantrag

[TENOR]

Das Revisionsverfahren wird eingestellt.

Das Urteil des Verwaltungsgerichts Düsseldorf vom 21. Juli 2020 ist wirkungslos.

Die Beklagte trägt die Kosten des gesamten Verfahrens.

[GRUENDE]

Nachdem die Beteiligten den Rechtsstreit übereinstimmend für erledigt erklärt haben, ist das Verfahren in entsprechender Anwendung von § 92 Abs. 3 i. V. m. § 141 Satz 1 und § 125 Abs. 1 Satz 1 VwGO einzustellen.

Gemäß § 173 Satz 1 VwGO i. V. m. einer entsprechenden Anwendung des § 269 Abs. 3 Satz 1 ZPO ist die Entscheidung der Vorinstanz wirkungslos.

Über die Kosten des Verfahrens in allen Instanzen ist nach § 161 Abs. 2 Satz 1 VwGO unter Berücksichtigung des bisherigen Sach- und Streitstandes nach billigem Ermessen zu entscheiden. Billigem Ermessen entspricht es in der Regel, demjenigen Verfahrensbeteiligten die Verfahrenskosten aufzuerlegen, der das erledigende Ereignis aus eigenem Willensentschluss herbeigeführt hat (BVerwG, Beschluss vom 3. April 2017 - 1 C 9.16 - Buchholz 402.251 § 31 AsylG Nr. 1 Rn. 7). Danach hat hier die Beklagte die Kosten zu tragen, da sie den Revisionskläger klaglos gestellt hat.

Gerichtskosten werden gemäß § 83b AsylG nicht erhoben. Der Gegenstandswert ergibt sich aus § 30 Abs. 1 Satz 1 RVG. Gründe für eine Abweichung gemäß § 30 Abs. 2 RVG liegen nicht vor.