projects

Revision admissible on professors’ scholarly works in appointment procedure

BVerwG 2 B 76/14, 2 B 76/14 (2 C 30/15)Bverwg / Division 2Dec 17, 2015Granted

Open source

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Administrative Court admitted the revision under § 132(2) No. 1 VwGO. It held that the case is capable of clarifying what duties appointment committees participating in the selection of a university professor owe with respect to taking cognizance of applicants’ scholarly works. The decision does not address the merits of the appointment dispute.

Omnilex headnote

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; revision admissibility for fundamental significance in professorial appointment proceedings. Fundamental significance exists where the proceeding is apt to clarify an unresolved legal question of general importance. This may be the case where it concerns the duties of university appointment committees in relation to the examination and consideration of applicants’ scholarly works. The decisive factor is the abstract need for clarification in revision proceedings; a concrete factual assessment of the individual appointment process is not yet required (consid. 1).

Full text

BVerwG — 2 B 76/14, 2 B 76/14 (2 C 30/15), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2015-12-17

Aktenzeichen: 2 B 76/14, 2 B 76/14 (2 C 30/15)

ECLI: ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2015:171215B2B76.14.0

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Normen: § 132 Abs 2 Nr 1 VwGO

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Oberverwaltungsgericht für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, 22. Juli 2014, Az: 6 A 815/11, Urteilvorgehend VG Minden, 25. Februar 2011, Az: 4 K 2936/09, Urteil

Spruchkörper: 2. Senat

Titelzeile

Wissenschaftliche Arbeiten von Bewerbern im professoralen Berufungsverfahren; Revisionszulassung

Gründe

1 Die Revision wird wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung der Rechtssache zugelassen (§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO). Das Revisionsverfahren erscheint geeignet zur Klärung beizutragen, welche Verpflichtungen Berufungskommissionen, die am Verfahren zur Vergabe des Amtes eines Professors an einer Universität beteiligt sind, hinsichtlich der Kenntnisnahme der von Bewerbern ausgearbeiteten wissenschaftlichen Arbeiten obliegen.

Keywords

revision admissibilityfundamental significanceprofessorial appointmentappointment committeescholarly worksuniversity procedure

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether the revision should be admitted for the fundamental legal question concerning appointment committees’ obligations to take account of applicants’ scholarly works in professorial appointment procedures.

Extracted holding

The revision was admitted because the case raises a question of fundamental significance that is suitable for clarification in revision proceedings.

Extracted reasoning

The court considered the appeal suitable to clarify which obligations appointment committees involved in selecting a university professor have concerning awareness and consideration of the scholarly works prepared by applicants.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.