Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
6 B 40/10, 6 B 40/10 (6 C 4/11) AI generated

Trust protection for competitors regarding time-limited regulatory approval of higher access charges

Case Number 6 B 40/10, 6 B 40/10 (6 C 4/11)
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 6. Senat) granted the interventionist’s complaint against the non-admission of the appeal, finding the matter to be of fundamental legal significance, thereby referring the case for review. The dispute concerned telecommunications regulation, specifically whether a time-limited regulatory approval for access charges granted to a regulated enterprise created a legitimate expectation or protection of reliance interests for competitors regarding subsequent approvals for higher charges covering the remaining duration. The court’s decisive legal basis was § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, establishing the criterion of "fundamental significance" to justify the admission of the appeal.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 52 Abs. 3 GKG, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 und 3 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 3 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG; Trust protection for competitors regarding time-limited regulatory approval of higher access charges: Senat) granted the interventionist’s complaint against the non-admission of the appeal, finding the matter to be of fundamental legal significance, thereby referring the case for review. The dispute concerned telecommunications regulation, specifically whether a time-limited regulatory approval for access charges granted to a regulated enterprise created a legitimate expectation or protection of reliance interests for competitors regarding subsequent approvals for higher charges covering the remaining duration. The court’s decisive legal basis was § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, establishing the criterion of "fundamental significance" to justify the admission of the appeal.

Keywords

AI generated
matters covered by the regulations matter in dispute trust protection of legitimate expectations duration of protection anti-trust legislation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Main ground for granting the complaint and admitting the revision due to the fundamental legal significance of the case.
§ 52 Abs. 3 GKG
§ 52 Abs. 3 GKG; die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
3, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG).
§ 47 Abs. 1 und 3 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 3 GKG
Basis for the determination of the court fees in the complaint procedure.
§ 47 Abs. 1 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Basis for the provisional determination of the court fees in the subsequent revision procedure.
AI generated
6 B 39/10, 6 B 39/10 (6 C 3/11)
Regulatory authorization of higher access charges: scope of legitimate expectations (Vertrauensschutz) arising from prior limited-period approval of lower rates for competitors
6 C 62/14
Third-party protection in standard offer review procedures under § 23 TKG: Subjective public rights of access-entitled competitors to challenge standard access contracts
6 B 36/19
Challenge to Regulatory Access Obligations: No Third-Party Standing Under § 21 TKG to Prevent Competitor's Future Interconnection Duties Under § 25 TKG
6 B 136/18
Admissibility of revision challenging ex-ante temporal limitation for comparative market analysis in telecom tariff approvals
6 B 47/15
Telecommunications access charge approval: discretion in capitalization rates under expired 1996 TKG and efficiency of organizational cost allocation

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Main ground for granting the complaint and admitting the revision due to the fundamental legal significance of the case.

§ 47 Abs. 1 und 3 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 3 GKG

Basis for the determination of the court fees in the complaint procedure.

§ 47 Abs. 1 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Basis for the provisional determination of the court fees in the subsequent revision procedure.

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

Nichtzulassungsbeschwerde; Telekommunikation; Regulierung; Vorleistungsentgelt

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerde der Beigeladenen gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision ist begründet. Die Rechtssache hat grundsätzliche Bedeutung (§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO). Sie kann zur Klärung der Frage beitragen, inwieweit eine dem regulierten Unternehmen erteilte befristete Genehmigung von Vorleistungsentgelten Vertrauensschutz zugunsten der Wettbewerber im Hinblick auf eine später für den Restzeitraum erteilte Genehmigung höherer Entgelte entfaltet.

Die Streitwertfestsetzung für das Beschwerdeverfahren folgt aus § 47 Abs. 1 und 3 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 3 GKG; die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG).