Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
10 B 21/16, 10 B 21/16 (10 C 4/17) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2017:210617B10B21.16.0 AI generated

Scope of asset allocation reservations under VZOG: limitation to corporate share divestments

Case Number 10 B 21/16, 10 B 21/16 (10 C 4/17)
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Germany (DE)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Court Costs No costs imposed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Federal Administrative Court granted the defendant’s complaint and admitted the appeal on grounds of fundamental significance, leaving no immediate judgment on the merits pending the subsequent revision proceedings. The dispute concerned the interpretation of property allocation reservations under the German Asset Allocation Act (VZOG), specifically whether such reservations are restricted to the factual context of the divestment of corporate shares. The decisive legal issue centers on the scope of §§ 1c and 11(1) Sentence 3 No. 5 VZOG, requiring the court to determine if the law implies a strict nexus between asset reservations and corporate share sales.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 6 Abs. 3 Satz 1 VZOG, § 6 Abs. 3 Satz 2 VZOG; Scope of asset allocation reservations under VZOG: limitation to corporate share divestments: The dispute concerned the interpretation of property allocation reservations under the German Asset Allocation Act (VZOG), specifically whether such reservations are restricted to the factual context of the divestment of corporate shares. The decisive legal issue centers on the scope of §§ 1c and 11(1) Sentence 3 No. 5 VZOG, requiring the court to determine if the law implies a strict nexus between asset reservations and corporate share sales.

Keywords

AI generated
restricted assets sale of shares interpretation of a judgment scope of expropriation pending proceedings patrimonial rights

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Legal basis for admitting the appeal on grounds of fundamental legal significance.
§ 6 Abs. 3 Satz 1 VZOG
Basis for the waiver of court costs.
§ 6 Abs. 3 Satz 2 VZOG
Basis for determining the amount in dispute for cost assessment purposes.
AI generated
10 C 4/17
Invalidity of contractual allocation reservations in asset deals under § 11(1)(3)(5) VZOG
3 B 8/10
Asset allocation revocation: Discretionary restrictions under VZOG and statute of limitations commencement
8 B 54/21, 8 B 54/21 (8 C 5/22)
§ 11 VZOG Restitution vs. prior asset allocation: whether valid prior allocation precludes restitution under Art. 21, 22 EV
3 B 36/11
Forfeiture of asset allocation claims and revocation of allocation orders under VZOG
3 B 3/12, 3 B 3/12 (3 C 12/12)
Allocation of former Prussian agricultural assets under § 2 Abs. 1 Satz 6 VZOG: sufficiency of agreement on general principles versus specific assets

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Legal basis for admitting the appeal on grounds of fundamental legal significance.

§ 6 Abs. 3 Satz 1 VZOG

Basis for the waiver of court costs.

§ 6 Abs. 3 Satz 2 VZOG

Basis for determining the amount in dispute for cost assessment purposes.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Revisionszulassung; Zuordnungsvorbehalte aus dem Vermögenszuordnungsgesetz

[GRUENDE]

Die zulässige Beschwerde der Beklagten ist begründet. Die Revision ist gemäß § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung zuzulassen. Das Revisionsverfahren führt auf die Frage, ob sich aus §§ 1c, 11 Abs. 1 Satz 3 Nr. 5 des Vermögenszuordnungsgesetzes - VZOG - ergibt, dass Zuordnungsvorbehalte nur im sachlichen Zusammenhang mit der Veräußerung von Unternehmensanteilen zulässig sind.

Gerichtskosten werden gemäß § 6 Abs. 3 Satz 1 VZOG nicht erhoben. Wegen des Gegenstandswerts wird auf § 6 Abs. 3 Satz 2 VZOG hingewiesen.