Revision admitted on 4% interest for deferred repayments

BVerwG 2 B 70/16, 2 B 70/16 (2 C 1/17)Bverwg / 2a divisione23 gen 2017Granted

Estratto da Omnilex

Sintesi Omnilex

The Federal Administrative Court admitted the revision limited to the legal question whether, given the historically low interest rate environment, a 4% interest rate may still lawfully be charged on deferred repayment claims. The court noted that there was no supreme-court authority on the issue and that the higher administrative courts had answered it differently. The decision concerns the admission of revision only; no merits ruling on the underlying claim was made.

Massima Omnilex

Art. 132 VwGO; admission of revision for a question of fundamental significance: where no highest-court authority exists and the lower appellate courts are divided, revision is to be admitted if the legal question concerns the continued permissibility of a fixed 4% interest rate on deferred repayment claims in a prolonged low-interest environment. The existence of divergent case law among higher administrative courts supports the need for clarification by the Federal Administrative Court (consid. 1-2).

Testo completo

BVerwG — 2 B 70/16, 2 B 70/16 (2 C 1/17), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2017-01-23

Aktenzeichen: 2 B 70/16, 2 B 70/16 (2 C 1/17)

ECLI: ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2017:230117B2B70.16.0

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Oberverwaltungsgericht für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, 20. Juli 2016, Az: 1 A 795/14, Urteilvorgehend VG Düsseldorf, 19. Februar 2014, Az: 10 K 9026/12

Spruchkörper: 2. Senat

Gründe

1 Die Revision ist hinsichtlich der Frage zuzulassen,

ob angesichts des historisch niedrigen Zinsniveaus eine Verzinslichstellung des gestundeten Betrags von 4 % zulässig ist.

2 Zu der Frage, ob es auch angesichts der derzeitigen langjährigen Niedrigzinsphase noch zulässig ist, einen Zins in Höhe von 4 % für die Stundung von Rückzahlungsforderungen zu erheben, gibt es bislang keine höchstrichterliche Rechtsprechung. Die Frage wird unter den Oberverwaltungsgerichten unterschiedlich beurteilt (vgl. OVG Weimar, Urteil vom 12. November 2015 - 2 KO 171/15 - juris Rn. 33 einerseits, OVG Münster, Urteil vom 24. Februar 2016 - 1 A 335/14 - juris Rn. 75 ff. andererseits).

3 Die vorläufige Festsetzung des Werts des Streitgegenstandes für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 3 Satz 1 GKG.

Parole chiave

revision admissioninterest ratedeferred paymentlow-interest environmentdivergent case lawadministrative litigation

Estratto da Omnilex

Questione giuridica chiave

Whether revision should be allowed on the legality of charging 4% interest on a deferred repayment amount in a period of historically low interest rates.

Decisione estratta

Revision was allowed on this legal question because it has not yet been decided by a supreme court and is treated inconsistently by the higher administrative courts.

Motivazione estratta

There is no existing highest-court case law on the issue, and the higher administrative courts have reached divergent conclusions.

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.