projects

Revision admitted on veterinary branch practice consent requirement

BVerwG 3 B 66/12, 3 B 66/12 (3 C 17/13)Bverwg / Division 3Jul 4, 2013Granted

Open source

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Administrative Court upheld the complainant's challenge to the non-admission of revision. It found that the case has fundamental significance because revision could clarify whether a chamber-based professional rule requiring approval for a veterinarian's second practice complies with freedom of occupation under Art. 12(1) GG. The complaint therefore succeeded.

Omnilex headnote

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; fundamental importance of a case is present where revision may clarify the constitutional compatibility of a chamber statute requiring consent for establishing a secondary professional practice. The need for clarification under Art. 12(1) GG can justify admission of revision when the scope and conditions of such a consent requirement remain unresolved (consid. 1).

Full text

BVerwG — 3 B 66/12, 3 B 66/12 (3 C 17/13), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2013-07-04

Aktenzeichen: 3 B 66/12, 3 B 66/12 (3 C 17/13)

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

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

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Oberverwaltungsgericht für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, 13. Juni 2012, Az: 13 A 1073/09, Urteil

Spruchkörper: 3. Senat

Titelzeile

Kammerrechtliche Berufsordnung; tierärztliche Zweitpraxis; Zustimmungserfordernis; Revisionszulassung

Gründe

1 Die Beschwerde des Klägers hat Erfolg. Die Rechtssache hat grundsätzliche Bedeutung im Sinne des § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO. Das Revisionsverfahren kann Gelegenheit zur Klärung der Frage bieten, ob und unter welchen Voraussetzungen das in einer Kammersatzung (Berufsordnung) vorgesehene Zustimmungserfordernis zur Errichtung einer tierärztlichen Zweitpraxis mit Art. 12 Abs. 1 GG vereinbar ist.

Keywords

freedom of occupationprofessional regulationsecondary practiceconsent requirementfundamental importancerevision admission

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether revision should be admitted because the case has fundamental significance concerning a chamber rule requiring consent for a veterinary secondary practice.

Extracted holding

Yes. The case raises a question of fundamental importance, namely whether and under what conditions a chamber statute's consent requirement for opening a second veterinary practice is compatible with freedom of occupation.

Extracted reasoning

The revision proceedings may clarify the constitutional compatibility of the consent requirement under Art. 12(1) GG, which is sufficient to justify fundamental importance under § 132(2) No. 1 VwGO.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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