Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
1 B 76/21, 1 B 76/21 (1 C 53/21) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2021:071221B1B76.21.0 AI generated

Standard of proof for "strong presumption" linking military service refusal to persecution under Qualification Directive

Case Number 1 B 76/21, 1 B 76/21 (1 C 53/21)
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Germany (DE)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Federal Administrative Court (BVerwG) overturned the Oberverwaltungsgericht Berlin-Brandenburg’s refusal to admit an appeal to the higher courts and granted the defendant’s request to allow a full appeal (Revision), deferring the cost allocation to the final judgment on the merits. The dispute, originating from an asylum application decision, concerns the standard of evidence required to presume a nexus between a refusal to perform military service under the specific circumstances defined in the EU Qualification Directive and one of the prohibited grounds of persecution, and the subsequent burden of rebutting this presumption. The court admitted the appeal under § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, citing the fundamental importance of the legal question regarding the application of the "strong presumption" established by the Court of Justice of the European Union and its specific impact on judicial conviction formation under § 108 Abs. 1 VwGO.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 3a Abs. 2 Nr. 5 AsylG, § 3b AsylG, § 108 Abs. 1 VwGO; Standard of proof for "strong presumption" linking military service refusal to persecution under Qualification Directive: The dispute, originating from an asylum application decision, concerns the standard of evidence required to presume a nexus between a refusal to perform military service under the specific circumstances defined in the EU Qualification Directive and one of the prohibited grounds of persecution, and the subsequent burden of rebutting this presumption. The court admitted the appeal under § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, citing the fundamental importance of the legal question regarding the application of the "strong presumption" established by the Court of Justice of the European Union and its specific impact on judicial conviction formation under § 108 Abs. 1 VwGO.

Keywords

AI generated
proof of persecution burden of proof military service asylum law legal presumption qualification directive

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Main ground for the verdict, explicitly cited as the legal basis for admitting the Revision due to the fundamental significance of the legal question.
§ 3a Abs. 2 Nr. 5 AsylG
e der Richtlinie 2011/95/EU (§ 3a Abs. 2 Nr. 5 AsylG) genannten Voraussetzungen mit einem der in Art.
§ 3b AsylG
§ 3b AsylG) genannten Verfolgungsgründe - sowie deren Widerlegung - zu stellen sind und welche Bedeutung einer solchen "starken Vermutung" im Rahmen der richterlichen Überzeugungsbildung (§ 108 Abs.
§ 108 Abs. 1 VwGO
§ 3b AsylG) genannten Verfolgungsgründe - sowie deren Widerlegung - zu stellen sind und welche Bedeutung einer solchen "starken Vermutung" im Rahmen der richterlichen Überzeugungsbildung (§ 108 Abs. 1 VwGO) zukommt.
AI generated
1 B 59/21, 1 B 59/21 (1 C 46/21)
Standard of proof for "strong presumption" linking military service refusal to persecution grounds under the Qualification Directive
1 B 46/21, 1 B 46/21 (1 C 38/21)
Standard for "strong presumption" linking refusal of military service to a persecution ground under the Qualification Directive
1 B 73/21, 1 B 73/21 (1 C 51/21)
Standard for "strong presumption" linking military service refusal to persecution under Directive 2011/95/EU
1 B 68/21, 1 B 68/21 (1 C 58/21)
Standard for establishing a "strong presumption" of persecution nexus for refusal of military service under the Qualification Directive
1 B 51/21, 1 B 51/21 (1 C 34/21)
Refusal of military service: evidentiary requirements for a "strong presumption" of persecution and its weight in judicial fact-finding under the Qualification Directive

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Main ground for the verdict, explicitly cited as the legal basis for admitting the Revision due to the fundamental significance of the legal question.

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

Die Entscheidung des Oberverwaltungsgerichts Berlin-Brandenburg über die Nichtzulassung der Revision gegen sein Urteil vom 12. Mai 2021 wird aufgehoben.

Die Revision wird zugelassen.

Die Entscheidung über die Kosten des Beschwerdeverfahrens folgt der Kostenentscheidung in der Hauptsache.

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerde der Beklagten ist zulässig und begründet.

Die Revision ist wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung der Rechtssache gemäß § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO zuzulassen. Sie kann dem Senat insgesamt Gelegenheit zur Klärung der Frage geben, welche Anforderungen an die Annahme einer "starken Vermutung" (EuGH, Urteil vom 19. November 2020 - C-238/19 [ECLI:EU:C:2020:945] - Rn. 57) für eine Verknüpfung zwischen der Verweigerung des Militärdienstes unter den in Art. 9 Abs. 2 Buchst. e der Richtlinie 2011/95/EU (§ 3a Abs. 2 Nr. 5 AsylG) genannten Voraussetzungen mit einem der in Art. 10 der Richtlinie 2011/95/EU (§ 3a Abs. 3 i.V.m. § 3b AsylG) genannten Verfolgungsgründe - sowie deren Widerlegung - zu stellen sind und welche Bedeutung einer solchen "starken Vermutung" im Rahmen der richterlichen Überzeugungsbildung (§ 108 Abs. 1 VwGO) zukommt.