projects

Revision allowed on university specialty exam pass rules

BVerwG 6 B 20/12, 6 B 20/12, 6 PKH 5/12 (6 C 18/12)Bverwg / Division 6Jul 31, 2012Granted

Open source

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Administrative Court allowed the claimant's complaint against the non-admission of revision in a dispute concerning pass rules for a university specialization-area examination under Section 5(1) DRiG. It held that the case has fundamental significance because it requires clarification of the constitutional requirements of Article 12(1) GG for such examination pass rules. The court also granted legal aid and appointed counsel, and it fixed the amount in dispute for the complaint and revision proceedings.

Omnilex headnote

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; revision admissibility for fundamental significance in examination law. A complaint against denial of leave to appeal is well-founded where the case raises a question of general importance requiring clarification of constitutional requirements under Art. 12 Abs. 1 GG for pass rules in university specialization-area examinations within the meaning of § 5 Abs. 1 DRiG. For admissibility, it suffices that the decisive legal question is capable of general clarification in the revision proceedings. Legal aid and appointment of counsel are governed by § 166 VwGO in conjunction with §§ 114, 119, 121 ZPO.

Full text

BVerwG — 6 B 20/12, 6 B 20/12, 6 PKH 5/12 (6 C 18/12), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2012-07-31

Aktenzeichen: 6 B 20/12, 6 B 20/12, 6 PKH 5/12 (6 C 18/12)

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Normen: § 5 Abs 1 DRiG, § 132 Abs 2 Nr 1 VwGO, Art 12 Abs 1 GG

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Verwaltungsgerichtshof Baden-Württemberg, 16. Februar 2012, Az: 9 S 2003/11, Urteil

Spruchkörper: 6. Senat

Titelzeile

Revisionszulassung; universitäre Schwerpunktbereichsprüfung; Erste juristische Staatsprüfung

Gründe

1 Die Beschwerde des Klägers gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision ist begründet. Die Revision ist wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung der Rechtssache (§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO) zuzulassen. Sie gibt dem Senat Gelegenheit zur Klärung der grundrechtlichen Vorgaben aus Art. 12 Abs. 1 GG für prüfungsrechtliche Bestehensregeln in Bezug auf universitäre Schwerpunktbereichsprüfungen im Sinne von § 5 Abs. 1 DRiG.

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

3 Die Bewilligung der Prozesskostenhilfe sowie die Beiordnung des Rechtsanwalts beruhen auf § 166 VwGO i.V.m. § 114 Satz 1, § 119 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 121 Abs. 1 ZPO.

Keywords

revision admissibilityfundamental significanceexamination lawpass ruleslegal aidconstitutional reviewprofessional qualification

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether revision should be allowed for the non-admission complaint because the case has fundamental significance regarding constitutional standards for pass rules in university specialization-area examinations.

Extracted holding

Revision was allowed because the case raises a question of fundamental significance under Article 12(1) of the Basic Law concerning pass requirements in university specialization-area examinations within the meaning of Section 5(1) DRiG.

Extracted reasoning

The court found that the complaint presents a clarifiable question of general importance, namely the constitutional requirements governing examination pass rules in this type of university examination.

Key legal question

Whether legal aid and appointment of counsel should be granted for the proceedings.

Extracted holding

Legal aid was granted and the lawyer appointed.

Extracted reasoning

The court based this on the statutory requirements for legal aid and counsel appointment.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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