projects

Compatibility of the Environmental Remedies Act with EU law

BVerwG 7 B 26/09, 7 B 26/09 (7 C 1/10)Bverwg / Division 7Jan 19, 2010Granted

Open source

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Administrative Court held that the complaint against the denial of leave to appeal was justified because the case presented a question of fundamental significance. The key issue was whether Section 5 UmwRG is compatible with EU law to the extent that it excludes Section 4 UmwRG for administrative proceedings initiated before 2005-06-25, even if the administrative decision was issued only after that date. The court also addressed the setting of the dispute value for the complaint and revision proceedings.

Omnilex headnote

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; fundamental importance of a case exists where a decisive legal question requires clarification in revision proceedings. A complaint against the refusal of leave to appeal is to be allowed if the appeal court decision depends on an unresolved question of law whose answer is relevant beyond the individual case. Where the compatibility of a national transitional provision with Union law is in dispute, and its scope determines whether a statutory remedy applies to pre-cutoff proceedings despite a later administrative decision, the matter is of fundamental significance and may justify admission of revision (consid. 1).

Full text

BVerwG — 7 B 26/09, 7 B 26/09 (7 C 1/10), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2010-01-19

Aktenzeichen: 7 B 26/09, 7 B 26/09 (7 C 1/10)

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Normen: § 4 UmwRG, § 5 UmwRG

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Oberverwaltungsgericht Rheinland-Pfalz, 12. Februar 2009, Az: 1 A 10722/08, Urteilnachgehend BVerwG, 10. Januar 2012, Az: 7 C 20/11, EuGH-Vorlage

Spruchkörper: 7. Senat

Titelzeile

Umwelt-Rechtsbehelfsgesetz; Vereinbarkeit mit Gemeinschaftsrecht

Gründe

1 Die Beschwerde der Kläger gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem angefochtenen Urteil ist begründet. Die Rechtssache hat grundsätzliche Bedeutung im Sinne des § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO. Sie wirft insbesondere die klärungsbedürftige Frage auf, ob § 5 UmwRBehG mit Gemeinschaftsrecht vereinbar ist, soweit er die Anwendbarkeit von § 4 UmwRBehG für Verwaltungsverfahren, die bis zum 25. Juni 2005 eingeleitet worden sind, auch dann ausschließt, wenn eine behördliche Entscheidung erst nach diesem Tag ergangen ist.

2 Die Festsetzung des Streitwerts beruht für das Beschwerdeverfahren auf § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und Abs. 3, § 52 Abs. 3 GKG, für das Revisionsverfahren auf § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 GKG.

Keywords

environmental remediesleave to appealfundamental importanceEU law compatibilitytransitional provision

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether the complaint against non-admission of the revision is well founded because the case raises a question of fundamental importance.

Extracted holding

Yes. The case raises a legally clarifying question of fundamental importance.

Extracted reasoning

The court found that the compatibility with EU law of Section 5 UmwRG, insofar as it excludes application of Section 4 UmwRG to proceedings initiated before 2005-06-25 even where the administrative decision was issued later, required clarification.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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