projects

Divergence on suspending a medical license after criminal proceedings end

BVerwG 3 B 34/11, 3 B 34/11 (3 C 31/11)Bverwg / Division 3Oct 26, 2011Granted

Open source

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Administrative Court held that the complaint against non-admission of revision was well-founded. The Administrative Court of Appeal had departed from prior case law on the suspension of a medical license under Section 6(1) No. 1 BÄO by assuming that the final conclusion of the criminal proceedings does not affect the legality of the suspension order. Because this divergence existed, revision had to be admitted under Section 132(2) No. 2 VwGO.

Omnilex headnote

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 2 VwGO; divergence justifying admission of revision in proceedings concerning suspension of a medical license under § 6 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 BÄO. A divergence exists where the appellate judgment applies a legal proposition that conflicts with a controlling legal proposition previously laid down by the Federal Administrative Court. For the suspension of an approbation, the final conclusion of the criminal proceedings removes the statutory prerequisites for the measure; a contrary view of the lower court constitutes a divergence warranting admission of revision (consid. 1).

Full text

BVerwG — 3 B 34/11, 3 B 34/11 (3 C 31/11), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2011-10-26

Aktenzeichen: 3 B 34/11, 3 B 34/11 (3 C 31/11)

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Normen: § 132 Abs 2 Nr 2 VwGO, § 6 Abs 1 Nr 1 BÄO

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Verwaltungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg, 1. März 2011, Az: 9 S 1255/08, Urteil

Spruchkörper: 3. Senat

Titelzeile

Anordnung des Ruhens der Approbation

Gründe

1 Die Beschwerde des Klägers ist begründet. Das Urteil des Verwaltungsgerichtshofs weicht im Sinne des § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 2 VwGO von dem Beschluss des Bundesverwaltungsgerichts vom 29. November 2007 - BVerwG 3 C 52.06 - ab. Während dem Beschluss des Bundesverwaltungsgerichts der Rechtssatz zugrunde liegt, dass die gesetzlichen Voraussetzungen für eine Anordnung des Ruhens der Approbation nach § 6 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 der Bundesärzteordnung - BÄO - entfallen, wenn das Strafverfahren rechtskräftig abgeschlossen ist, beruht das angegriffene Urteil des Verwaltungsgerichtshofs auf dessen Rechtsauffassung, dass der rechtskräftige Abschluss des Strafverfahrens der Rechtmäßigkeit der Ruhensanordnung nicht entgegensteht.

2 Die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1, § 52 Abs. 1, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.

Keywords

divergencerevisionmedical licensesuspensioncriminal proceedingsapprobation

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether revision had to be admitted because the appellate judgment diverged from prior Federal Administrative Court case law on suspending a medical license under Section 6(1) No. 1 BÄO after criminal proceedings end.

Extracted holding

Yes. The appellate court adopted a legal view that conflicts with Federal Administrative Court precedent; according to that precedent, the statutory conditions for suspending the license cease once the criminal proceedings have been finally concluded.

Extracted reasoning

The challenged judgment was based on the proposition that a final conclusion of the criminal proceedings does not affect the legality of the suspension order, whereas the prior Federal Administrative Court decision held the opposite. That divergence satisfies the ground for admission under Section 132(2) No. 2 VwGO.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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