Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
8 B 8/24, 8 B 8/24 (8 C 6/24) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2024:131124B8B8.24.0 Generato dall'IA

Spatial scope of § 1 Abs. 6 VermG and sufficiency of seat relocation for minority shareholder compensation nexus

Numero d'incarto 8 B 8/24, 8 B 8/24 (8 C 6/24)
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 set aside the lower court’s decision on non-admission and admitted the appeal on points of law, resulting in the prevailing party being the appellant who successfully challenged the initial refusal. The dispute concerns the spatial scope of Germany’s Compensation Act (VermG), specifically whether the required territorial nexus for compensation of minority shareholder damages (Sitzverlegung) is satisfied when an issuer moves its administrative seat from the reintegration zone to the scope of Allied restitution law, without necessarily relocating its statutory registered seat. The decisive legal basis is § 1 Abs. 6 VermG regarding the spatial applicability of compensation for Allied-era expropriations, and the case was admitted under § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO due to fundamental legal significance, with the value in dispute set at 500,000 EUR.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 GKG; Spatial scope of § 1 Abs. 6 VermG and sufficiency of seat relocation for minority shareholder compensation nexus: The dispute concerns the spatial scope of Germany’s Compensation Act (VermG), specifically whether the required territorial nexus for compensation of minority shareholder damages (Sitzverlegung) is satisfied when an issuer moves its administrative seat from the reintegration zone to the scope of Allied restitution law, without necessarily relocating its statutory registered seat. The decisive legal basis is § 1 Abs. 6 VermG regarding the spatial applicability of compensation for Allied-era expropriations, and the case was admitted under § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO due to fundamental legal significance, with the value in dispute set at 500,000 EUR.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
indennità d'espropriazione azionista di minoranza ambito di applicazione territoriale valore litigioso base legale diritto territoriale

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Basis for admitting the revision due to the fundamental significance of the legal question regarding the spatial scope of the Compensation Act.
§ 63 Abs. 1 GKG
Die Streitwertfestsetzung beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1 und 3 i. V. m. § 52 Abs. 1 und Abs. 4 Nr. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 GKG.
Generato dall'IA
8 C 2/18
Territorial scope of § 1 Abs. 6 VermG for assets transferred to Allied restitution jurisdiction before the Act's entry into force
8 B 47/13
Scope of spatial applicability of Vermögensgesetz to supplementary restitution of foreign-resident companies' assets in the accession territory
8 C 6.24
Location of Persecution-Forced Corporate Shares: Statutory Seat as Decisive Criterion for Asset Act Scope Versus Allied Restitution Jurisdiction
8 B 25/17, 8 B 25/17 (8 C 2/18)
Applicability of § 1 Abs. 6 VermG to Pre-1945 Losses in Former East Germany When Corporate Seat Moved West Before May 1945
8 B 84/11
Restitution of corporate assets under the Vermögensgesetz: Requirement for internal nexus in stretched injury and exclusion of assets from enterprise holdings prior to expropriation

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

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

Basis for admitting the revision due to the fundamental significance of the legal question regarding the spatial scope of the Compensation Act.

§ 47 Abs. 1 und 3 i. V. m. § 52 Abs. 1 und Abs. 4 Nr. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 GKG

Legal basis for the determination of the value in dispute (Streitwert) for the complaint and 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; räumlicher Geltungsbereich des § 1 Abs. 6 VermG

[TENOR]

Die Entscheidung des Verwaltungsgerichts Berlin über die Nichtzulassung der Revision gegen sein Urteil vom 14. Dezember 2023, berichtigt durch Beschluss vom 25. Januar 2024, wird aufgehoben.

Die Revision wird zugelassen.

Die Entscheidung über die Kosten des Beschwerdeverfahrens folgt der Kostenentscheidung in der Hauptsache.

Der Wert des Streitgegenstandes wird für das Beschwerdeverfahren und für das Revisionsverfahren - insoweit vorläufig - auf jeweils 500 000 € festgesetzt.

[GRUENDE]

Die zulässige Beschwerde ist begründet. Der Rechtssache kommt die geltend gemachte grundsätzliche Bedeutung zu (§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO). Die Beschwerdebegründung führt auf die Frage, ob eine Beendigung des nach § 1 Abs. 6 VermG erforderlichen räumlichen Bezugs einer Anteilsschädigung zum Beitrittsgebiet durch Sitzverlegung des dort ansässigen Emittenten in den räumlichen Geltungsbereich des alliierten Rückerstattungsrechts eine Verlegung seines satzungsmäßigen Sitzes dorthin voraussetzt.

Die Streitwertfestsetzung beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1 und 3 i. V. m. § 52 Abs. 1 und Abs. 4 Nr. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 GKG.