BVerwG 3 B 55/15, 3 B 55/15 (3 C 22/16)•Leave to appeal granted on limits of arbitration boards
BVerwG 3 B 55/15, 3 B 55/15 (3 C 22/16)Bverwg / Division 3Sep 28, 2016Granted
Extracted by Omnilex
The Federal Administrative Court granted the intervening party’s complaint against denial of leave to appeal. It held that the case has fundamental significance because the revision proceedings are likely to clarify the legal limits binding the arbitration board when setting hospital-specific daily charges under the KHEntgG. The order also noted the provisional value of the subject matter for the revision proceedings.
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; leave to appeal on grounds of fundamental significance: The complaint is successful where the case raises an unresolved legal question of general importance and the revision court is likely to use the proceedings to clarify the legal limits of the administrative or quasi-administrative body’s decision-making competence. In disputes under §§ 13(1) sentence 2, 14(1) sentence 2 and 6(1) KHEntgG, the scope of review concerning the fixing of hospital-specific daily charges may justify revision if the applicable statutory boundaries require doctrinal clarification (consid. 1).
Entscheidungsdatum: 2016-09-28
Aktenzeichen: 3 B 55/15, 3 B 55/15 (3 C 22/16)
ECLI: ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2016:280916B3B55.15.0
Dokumenttyp: Beschluss
Normen: § 13 Abs 1 KHEntgG, § 14 Abs 1 S 2 KHEntgG, § 6 Abs 1 KHEntgG
Vorinstanz: vorgehend Hessischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof, 7. Mai 2015, Az: 5 A 520/13, Urteilvorgehend VG Gießen, 11. Dezember 2012, Az: 7 K 4109/11.GI
Spruchkörper: 3. Senat
Revisionszulassung; Grenzpräzisierung für Schiedsstellen bei Festsetzungen von Entgelten
1 Die Beschwerde der Beigeladenen hat Erfolg. Die Rechtssache hat grundsätzliche Bedeutung im Sinne von § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO. Das Revisionsverfahren wird dem Senat voraussichtlich Gelegenheit geben, die rechtlichen Grenzen zu präzisieren, denen die Schiedsstelle nach § 13 Abs. 1 Satz 2, § 14 Abs. 1 Satz 2 des Krankenhausentgeltgesetzes (KHEntgG) bei der Entscheidung über die Festsetzung krankenhausindividueller tagesbezogener Entgelte gemäß § 6 Abs. 1 KHEntgG unterliegt.
2 Die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.
Extracted by Omnilex
Whether the matter had fundamental significance justifying leave to appeal.
Yes. The revision court is expected to clarify the legal limits governing the arbitration board when setting hospital-specific daily charges under the KHEntgG.
The appeal raises an unresolved legal question under §§ 13(1) sentence 2 and 14(1) sentence 2 KHEntgG in conjunction with § 6(1) KHEntgG, so clarification by the revision court is likely needed.
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.