Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
4 BN 17/23, 4 BN 17/23 (4 CN 1/24) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2024:250124B4BN17.23.0 Generato dall'IA

Admissibility of Revision on Fundamental Significance for Retail Exclusion in Land-Use Planning under § 9 Abs. 2a BauGB

Numero d'incarto 4 BN 17/23, 4 BN 17/23 (4 CN 1/24)
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 quashed the higher regional administrative court's decision not to admit the revision and granted the applicant leave to appeal, ordering that the legal dispute be re-tried on the merits with a provisional value in dispute of €50,000. The case concerned a challenge to a land-use plan based on § 9 Abs. 2a BauGB that excluded retail businesses, including those with non-center-relevant assortments, from specific zones. The decisive legal basis for the court's order is § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, as the matter was determined to be of fundamental legal significance, requiring clarification on the requirements for planning necessity, defects in stipulations, and errors in the balancing of interests associated with such zoning exclusions.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG; Admissibility of Revision on Fundamental Significance for Retail Exclusion in Land-Use Planning under § 9 Abs. 2a BauGB: The case concerned a challenge to a land-use plan based on § 9 Abs. 2a BauGB that excluded retail businesses, including those with non-center-relevant assortments, from specific zones. The decisive legal basis for the court's order is § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, as the matter was determined to be of fundamental legal significance, requiring clarification on the requirements for planning necessity, defects in stipulations, and errors in the balancing of interests associated with such zoning exclusions.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
non attribuzione a una zona revisione del piano regolatore impugnazione di decisioni amministrative piano di utilizzazione regionale materie escluse divieto di accedere a un dato territorio

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Main ground for granting leave to appeal due to the fundamental legal significance of the issues regarding zoning exclusions under § 9 Abs. 2a BauGB.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.
§ 47 Abs. 1, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Procedural basis for the provisional determination of the value in dispute for the appellate proceedings.
Generato dall'IA
4 BN 1/13
Validity of retail restriction plans under § 9 Abs. 2a BauGB and municipal planning authority over railway land
4 BN 8/13
Sufficiency of urban planning justification for total retail exclusion under § 9 Abs. 2a BauGB
4 CN 1/24
Sectoral development plan retail exclusion: necessity of concrete urban planning justification and requirement of existing facility types under § 9 Abs. 2a BauGB
4 B 6/24, 4 B 6/24 (4 C 2/24)
Residential use and exclusion of factual core zone status under § 34 BauGB
4 BN 35/11
§ 215 BauGB objection deadline: substantiation required for land-use plan defects not merely by filing a norm control application

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

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

Main ground for granting leave to appeal due to the fundamental legal significance of the issues regarding zoning exclusions under § 9 Abs. 2a BauGB.

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

Procedural basis for the provisional determination of the value in dispute for the appellate 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; Ausschluss von Einzelhandel mit nicht zentrenrelevanten Sortimenten in Bebauungsplan nach § 9 Abs. 2a BauGB

[TENOR]

Auf die Beschwerde der Antragstellerin wird die Entscheidung des Schleswig-Holsteinischen Oberverwaltungsgerichts über die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Urteil vom 2. März 2023 aufgehoben.

Die Revision wird zugelassen.

Die Kostenentscheidung bleibt der Schlussentscheidung vorbehalten.

Der Wert des Streitgegenstandes wird für das Revisionsverfahren vorläufig auf 50 000 € festgesetzt.

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerde der Antragstellerin ist zulässig und 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, wie bei einem auf § 9 Abs. 2a BauGB gestützten Bebauungsplan, mit dem auch Einzelhandelsbetriebe mit nicht zentrenrelevanten Sortimenten ausgeschlossen werden, die Anforderungen an die Erforderlichkeit der Planung, Festsetzungsmängel und Fehler der Abwägung abzugrenzen sind.

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