projects

Revision admissible on compensation for hereditary building right

BVerwG 5 B 29/09, 5 B 29/09 (5 C 3/10)Bverwg / Division 5Jan 26, 2010Granted

Open source

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Administrative Court admitted revision against the judgment of the Administrative Court of Leipzig. The court found that the case raises a question of fundamental importance: the basis for calculating compensation for a hereditary building right on a rubble property and the interpretation of § 3(1) sentence 1 nos. 4 and 5 EntschG.

Omnilex headnote

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; admission of revision for fundamental importance. A revision is to be allowed where the case raises a question of fundamental significance. This is the case where clarification is needed for the assessment basis of compensation for a hereditary building right on a so-called rubble property and where the interpretation of § 3 Abs. 1 Satz 1 Nr. 4 and Nr. 5 EntschG is capable of contributing to the development or clarification of the law.

Full text

BVerwG — 5 B 29/09, 5 B 29/09 (5 C 3/10), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2010-01-26

Aktenzeichen: 5 B 29/09, 5 B 29/09 (5 C 3/10)

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Normen: § 3 Abs 1 S 1 Nr 4 EntschG, § 3 Abs 1 S 1 Nr 5 EntschG

Vorinstanz: vorgehend VG Leipzig, 27. Januar 2009, Az: 1 K 551/06, Urteil

Spruchkörper: 5. Senat

Titelzeile

Revision; Entschädigungsrecht

Gründe

1 Die Revision gegen das Urteil des Verwaltungsgerichts Leipzig vom 27. Januar 2009 ist nach § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung der Rechtssache zuzulassen. Die Revision kann Gelegenheit geben, die Frage der Bemessungsgrundlage der Entschädigung für ein Erbbaurecht an einem sog. Trümmergrundstück zu klären und zur Auslegung des Bedeutungsgehaltes des § 3 Abs. 1 Satz 1 Nr. 4 und Nr. 5 EntschG beitragen.

Keywords

revisionfundamental importancecompensationhereditary building rightrubble propertyassessment basisstatutory interpretation

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether revision should be admitted for reasons of fundamental importance

Extracted holding

Revision is admitted because the case raises questions of fundamental importance.

Extracted reasoning

The appeal can clarify the assessment basis for compensation of a hereditary building right on a so-called rubble property and contribute to the interpretation of § 3(1) sentence 1 nos. 4 and 5 EntschG.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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