projects

Non-admission complaint allowed for fundamental importance

BVerwG 6 B 17/12, 6 B 17/12 (6 C 20/12)Bverwg / Division 6Aug 9, 2012Granted

Open source

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Administrative Court held that the defendant's complaint against the refusal to admit the revision was well founded. The case raises a question of fundamental importance: whether a state-treaty rule governing subsidies for Jewish communities may be interpreted so that decisive distribution requirements are subject to the exclusive review competence of a third party. The court saw possible implications for the constitutional guarantee of justice under Art. 20(3) GG and Art. 92 GG.

Omnilex headnote

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; fundamental importance and access to judicial protection: a complaint against denial of leave to appeal is well founded where the case is capable of clarifying whether a treaty-based subsidy rule may be construed so that criteria decisive for distribution fall within the exclusive review competence of a third party. Such a construction may raise issues under the constitutional duty to provide effective judicial protection, particularly in light of Art. 20(3) GG in conjunction with Art. 92 GG.

Full text

BVerwG — 6 B 17/12, 6 B 17/12 (6 C 20/12), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2012-08-09

Aktenzeichen: 6 B 17/12, 6 B 17/12 (6 C 20/12)

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Oberverwaltungsgericht des Landes Sachsen-Anhalt, 20. Juli 2011, Az: 3 L 166/10, Urteil

Spruchkörper: 6. Senat

Gründe

1 Die Beschwerde des Beklagten gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision ist begründet. Die Rechtssache hat die sinngemäß geltend gemachte grundsätzliche Bedeutung im Sinne des § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO. Sie kann zur Klärung der Frage beitragen, ob es mit der Justizgewährungspflicht (Art. 20 Abs. 3 GG i.V.m. Art. 92 GG) vereinbar ist, wenn eine staatsvertragliche Regelung über einen Landeszuschuss für jüdische Gemeinden dahin ausgelegt wird, dass für die Verteilung maßgebliche Erfordernisse der ausschließlichen Prüfungskompetenz eines Dritten unterliegen.

Keywords

judicial protectionfundamental importanceleave to appealstate subsidyJewish communitiesthird-party reviewconstitutional duty

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether the complaint against denial of leave to appeal had fundamental importance under Section 132(2)(1) VwGO.

Extracted holding

Yes. The case could clarify whether a treaty-based rule on a state subsidy for Jewish communities may validly assign decisive distribution requirements to a third party's exclusive review competence.

Extracted reasoning

The legal question raised concerns access to judicial protection and the compatibility of the interpretation with the constitutional duty to provide justice under Art. 20(3) GG in conjunction with Art. 92 GG.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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