Revision admissible on reliance protection between authorities

BVerwG 8 B 44/11, 8 B 44/11 (8 C 18/11)Bverwg / Division 822 de ago. de 2011Granted

Abrir fonte

Extraído pela Omnilex

Resumo Omnilex

The Federal Administrative Court upheld the complaint against non-admission of revision. It held that the dispute raises a question of fundamental significance: whether a municipality may invoke legitimate expectations against the withdrawal of an unlawful subsidy decision by a Land authority when both authorities had previously agreed on an administrative practice to ensure legal certainty. The court further indicated that the case may require clarification whether such an arrangement is a public-law settlement under § 55 VwVfG and, if so, what consequences follow.

Sumário Omnilex

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; admission of revision for fundamental significance where a public authority relies on legitimate expectations against another authority's withdrawal of an unlawful subsidy decision. The question whether an earlier agreement between authorities on a common administrative practice qualifies as a public-law settlement under § 55 VwVfG, and what legal effects attach to it, may require clarification in revision. A dispute is of fundamental significance if it calls for a generalizable clarification of a previously unresolved legal question relevant to the appealed judgment (consid. 1).

Texto completo

BVerwG — 8 B 44/11, 8 B 44/11 (8 C 18/11), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2011-08-22

Aktenzeichen: 8 B 44/11, 8 B 44/11 (8 C 18/11)

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Normen: § 55 VwVfG

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Oberverwaltungsgericht Rheinland-Pfalz, 11. Februar 2011, Az: 2 A 10895/10, Urteil

Spruchkörper: 8. Senat

Titelzeile

Revisionszulassung; kann eine Behörde bei der Rücknahme eines rechtswidrigen Subventionsbescheides durch eine andere Behörde Vertrauensschutz geltend machen?

Gründe

1 Die Beschwerde hat Erfolg. Der Rechtssache kommt die von der Klägerin geltend gemachte grundsätzliche Bedeutung zu (§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO). Im Revisionsverfahren wird voraussichtlich zu klären sein, ob sich eine Behörde (Gemeinde) gegenüber der Rücknahme eines rechtswidrigen Subventionsbescheides durch eine andere Behörde (Land) dann auf Vertrauensschutz berufen darf, wenn die andere Behörde mit der Rücknahme von einer Verwaltungspraxis abweicht, auf die sich beide zuvor zur Erzielung von Rechtssicherheit geeinigt hatten. Dabei dürfte sich auch die Frage stellen, ob eine derartige Vereinbarung den Begriff des öffentlich-rechtlichen Vergleichsvertrages (vgl. § 55 VwVfG) erfüllt und welche Rechtsfolgen daraus zu ziehen wären.

Palavras-chave

revision admissibilityfundamental importancelegitimate expectationspublic-law settlementsubsidy withdrawaladministrative practice

Extraído pela Omnilex

Questão jurídica principal

Whether the case raises a question of fundamental importance justifying admission of revision, namely whether one authority may invoke legitimate expectations against another authority's withdrawal of an unlawful subsidy decision.

Decisão extraída

The complaint succeeds because the case presents a question of fundamental importance requiring clarification in revision.

Fundamentação extraída

It remains to be clarified whether a municipality may rely on legitimate expectations when a Land authority withdraws an unlawful subsidy decision and departs from an earlier administrative practice agreed upon by both authorities to ensure legal certainty. The court also notes that this raises the additional question whether such an agreement qualifies as a public-law settlement under § 55 VwVfG and what legal consequences would follow.

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.