projects

Whether the 18-month waiting period depends on the concrete or abstract office

BVerwG 2 B 20/13, 2 B 20/13 (2 C 28/13)Bverwg / Division 2May 13, 2013Granted

Open source

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Administrative Court admitted the plaintiff’s revision in a dispute over an allowance for performing a higher-ranking office. It held that the case has fundamental importance because it requires clarification of whether the 18-month waiting period under Section 46(1) BBesG depends on the concrete-functional office or the abstract-functional office.

Omnilex headnote

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; admission of revision for fundamental importance; where the applicability of an allowance under § 46 Abs. 1 BBesG turns on the 18-month waiting period, the decisive criterion—concrete-functional office or abstract-functional office—requires clarification by way of revision if the lower courts have not resolved the issue. The appeal is admissible when the case is suitable to clarify this unresolved legal question (consid. 1).

Full text

BVerwG — 2 B 20/13, 2 B 20/13 (2 C 28/13), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2013-05-13

Aktenzeichen: 2 B 20/13, 2 B 20/13 (2 C 28/13)

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Normen: § 46 Abs 1 BBesG

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Sächsisches Oberverwaltungsgericht, 30. Oktober 2012, Az: 2 A 42/12, Urteil

Spruchkörper: 2. Senat

Titelzeile

Zulage für die Wahrnehmung eines höherwertigen Amtes

Gründe

1 Die Revision des Klägers ist zuzulassen, weil die Rechtssache grundsätzliche Bedeutung im Sinne von § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO hat. Das Revisionsverfahren erscheint zur Klärung der sinngemäß aufgeworfenen Frage geeignet, ob bei der Erfüllung der 18-monatigen Wartefrist des Zulagentatbestandes des § 46 Abs. 1 BBesG auf das Amt im konkret-funktionellen Sinne (Aufgaben des konkreten Dienstpostens) oder auf das Amt im abstrakt-funktionellen Sinne abzustellen ist.

Keywords

revision admissibilityfundamental importanceallowancehigher-ranking officewaiting periodpublic service pay

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether revision should be admitted because the case raises a question of fundamental importance under Section 132(2)(1) VwGO regarding the 18-month waiting period in Section 46(1) BBesG.

Extracted holding

Revision is admitted because clarification is needed on whether the waiting period is measured by the concrete-functional office or the abstract-functional office.

Extracted reasoning

The case is suitable for clarifying the legal question raised by the plaintiff and therefore has fundamental importance.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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