BAföG reimbursement dispute: whether an application is required

BVerwG 5 B 5/13, 5 B 5/13 (5 C 19/13)Bverwg / Division 5Mar 14, 2013Granted

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Administrative Court upheld the complaint against non-admission of revision. It held that the case has fundamental significance because it may clarify whether, in a reimbursement dispute between a social welfare authority and the student aid office, an application requirement exists under § 46 BAföG. The revision was therefore admitted.

Omnilex headnote

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; admission of revision for fundamental significance; a complaint is well-founded if the case raises an unresolved, legally significant question capable of clarification in revision. In a reimbursement dispute between a social welfare authority and an Amt für Ausbildungsförderung, the existence of an application requirement under § 46 BAföG constitutes such a question where its resolution is decisive for the claim structure and has significance beyond the individual case.

Full text

BVerwG — 5 B 5/13, 5 B 5/13 (5 C 19/13), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2013-03-14

Aktenzeichen: 5 B 5/13, 5 B 5/13 (5 C 19/13)

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Normen: § 132 Abs 2 Nr 1 VwGO, § 46 BAföG

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Oberverwaltungsgericht für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, 17. Dezember 2012, Az: 12 A 1949/12, Urteil

Spruchkörper: 5. Senat

Titelzeile

Ausbildungsförderung; Erstattungsstreit

Gründe

1 Die Beschwerde des Klägers ist zulässig und begründet. Die Revision ist nach § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung der Rechtssache zuzulassen.

2 Die Revision kann dem Senat Gelegenheit geben, die grundsätzliche Frage zu klären, ob in einem Erstattungsstreit eines Sozialhilfeträgers gegenüber einem Amt für Ausbildungsförderung ein Antragserfordernis im Sinne von § 46 BAföG besteht.

Keywords

educational supportreimbursement disputefundamental significanceleave to appealapplication requirement

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether revision should be admitted for fundamental significance.

Extracted holding

Yes. The complaint was admissible and well-founded; revision was admitted under § 132(2) No. 1 VwGO.

Extracted reasoning

The case raises the fundamental question whether, in a reimbursement dispute by a social welfare authority against a student aid office, an application requirement exists within the meaning of § 46 BAföG.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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