Plan approval defect: preservation for part of project

BVerwG 7 B 44/11, 7 B 44/11 (7 C 10/12)Bverwg / Division 728 de mar. de 2012Granted

Abrir fonte

Extraído pela Omnilex

Resumo Omnilex

The Federal Administrative Court upheld the complaint against the denial of leave to appeal in a planning approval dispute. It held that the case raises a question of fundamental importance concerning the reach of § 75(1a) sentence 2 VwVfG, namely whether plan preservation is possible only for part of a project. The complaint was therefore successful.

Sumário Omnilex

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; § 75 Abs. 1a S. 2 VwVfG; fundamental importance of the question whether plan preservation may extend only to part of a project. A complaint against the refusal of leave to appeal is well-founded where the appeal proceedings are expected to clarify an unresolved question on the scope of the plan-preservation provision. The existence of a need for clarification is sufficient; it is not required that the answer be already evident from the statute or settled case law.

Texto completo

BVerwG — 7 B 44/11, 7 B 44/11 (7 C 10/12), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2012-03-28

Aktenzeichen: 7 B 44/11, 7 B 44/11 (7 C 10/12)

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Normen: § 75 Abs 1a S 2 VwVfG

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Oberverwaltungsgericht für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, 15. März 2011, Az: 20 A 2147/09, Urteil

Spruchkörper: 7. Senat

Titelzeile

Planfeststellungsbeschluss; Planerhaltung bei Abwägungsmangel

Gründe

1 Die Beschwerde der Beigeladenen gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem angefochtenen Urteil ist begründet. Die Rechtssache hat grundsätzliche Bedeutung im Sinne des § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO. Sie wirft voraussichtlich u.a. die klärungsbedürftige Frage auf, inwieweit § 75 Abs. 1a Satz 2 VwVfG die Planerhaltung für einen Teil des Vorhabens ermöglicht.

Palavras-chave

planning approvalplan preservationnon-admission complaintfundamental importancepartial projectadministrative procedure

Extraído pela Omnilex

Questão jurídica principal

Whether leave to appeal should be granted because the case raises a fundamental question about § 75(1a) sentence 2 VwVfG and partial plan preservation.

Decisão extraída

Yes. The complaint was well-founded because the case raised a question of fundamental importance, namely to what extent § 75(1a) sentence 2 VwVfG allows preservation of a plan for only part of the project.

Fundamentação extraída

The court found the legal question unresolved and worthy of clarification in revision proceedings.

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

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