Revision allowed on planning conflict and § 15 BauNVO

BVerwG 4 B 45/12, 4 B 45/12 (4 C 8/12)Bverwg / Division 4Apr 26, 2013Granted

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Administrative Court allowed the complaint against the denial of revision. It held that revision should be admitted because the case can contribute to clarifying the relationship between the duty of planning conflict resolution and the scope of § 15(1) sentences 1 and 2 BauNVO.

Omnilex headnote

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; admission of revision for clarification of the relationship between planning conflict resolution and the scope of § 15 Abs. 1 S. 1 or S. 2 BauNVO. Revision is to be admitted where the contested judgment raises a question of principle whose resolution can further develop the law in a revisional proceeding. This is the case in particular when the interplay between a general planning principle and the application of a zoning provision requires doctrinal clarification (cf. consid. 1).

Full text

BVerwG — 4 B 45/12, 4 B 45/12 (4 C 8/12), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2013-04-26

Aktenzeichen: 4 B 45/12, 4 B 45/12 (4 C 8/12)

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Normen: § 15 Abs 1 S 1 BauNVO, § 15 Abs 1 S 2 BauNVO

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Oberverwaltungsgericht Berlin-Brandenburg, 7. Juni 2012, Az: OVG 2 B 18.11, Urteil

Spruchkörper: 4. Senat

Titelzeile

Revisionszulassung; Klärung des Verhältnisses zwischen dem Gebot planerischer Konfliktbewältigung und dem Anwendungsbereich

Gründe

1 Die Beschwerde ist begründet. Die Revision ist nach § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO zuzulassen, weil das Revisionsverfahren zur weiteren Klärung des Verhältnisses zwischen dem Gebot planerischer Konfliktbewältigung und dem Anwendungsbereich des § 15 Abs. 1 Satz 1 oder 2 BauNVO beitragen kann.

Keywords

revision admissibilityplanning conflict resolutionzoning lawlegal question of principle

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether revision should be admitted to clarify the relationship between planning conflict resolution and the scope of § 15(1) sentences 1 and 2 BauNVO.

Extracted holding

Revision is admissible because the case may further clarify that relationship.

Extracted reasoning

The issue raises a question of principle under § 132(2)(1) VwGO and merits clarification in the revision proceedings.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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