BVerwG 7 B 12/16, 7 B 12/16 (7 C 8/17)•Revision admitted; meaning of professional activity
BVerwG 7 B 12/16, 7 B 12/16 (7 C 8/17)Bverwg / Division 7Feb 7, 2017Granted
Extracted by Omnilex
The Federal Administrative Court upheld the complaints and admitted the revisions. It held that the case may help clarify the meaning of 'professional activity' in Section 2 No. 4 USchadG, which gives the matter fundamental significance under Section 132(2)(1) VwGO. The decision also mentions a provisional dispute value assessment for the revision proceedings.
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; revision admissibility on grounds of fundamental significance; the requirement is met where the disputed legal question is capable of clarifying an open statutory concept of general importance. The revising court need not decide the merits at the admission stage; it suffices that the case may contribute to the development or uniform application of the law. The interpretation of the term 'professional activity' in § 2 Nr. 4 USchadG was regarded as such a question (consid. 1).
Entscheidungsdatum: 2017-02-07
Aktenzeichen: 7 B 12/16, 7 B 12/16 (7 C 8/17)
ECLI: ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2017:070217B7B12.16.0
Dokumenttyp: Beschluss
Normen: § 132 Abs 2 Nr 1 VwGO, § 2 Nr 4 USchadG
Vorinstanz: vorgehend Oberverwaltungsgericht für das Land Schleswig-Holstein, 4. Februar 2016, Az: 1 LB 2/13, Urteilvorgehend Schleswig-Holsteinisches Verwaltungsgericht, 20. September 2012, Az: 6 A 186/11, Urteil
Spruchkörper: 7. Senat
Revisionszulassung; Begriff der beruflichen Tätigkeit
1 Die zulässigen Beschwerden sind begründet. Die Revisionen sind gemäß § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO zuzulassen. Das Revisionsverfahren kann zur Klärung des Begriffs der beruflichen Tätigkeit im Sinne des § 2 Nr. 4 des Umweltschadensgesetzes beitragen.
2 Die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 GKG.
Extracted by Omnilex
Whether the complaints justified admission of the revision under Section 132(2)(1) VwGO
Yes. The complaints were admissible and well-founded, and the revision had to be admitted for reasons of fundamental significance.
Clarification of the concept of professional activity within Section 2 No. 4 USchadG can contribute to the development of the law and therefore raises a question of fundamental importance.
Whether the concept of 'professional activity' under Section 2 No. 4 USchadG requires clarification in revision proceedings
Yes. The case is suitable for clarifying that statutory concept in revision.
The court considered the legal meaning of the term open and capable of contributing to the clarification of an issue of general importance.
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.