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

Admissibility of expropriation under § 85(1) No. 1 BauGB for road projects based on isolated road development plans

Case Number 4 B 10/11, 4 B 10/11 (4 C 6/11)
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 granted the complainants' appeal and ordered the lower court to permit the revision, thereby allowing the case to proceed to a full appellate hearing on the merits. The dispute concerns the validity of a compulsory expropriation measure conducted under a standalone road development plan, where the landowners challenged the legal basis for the expropriation. The decisive legal issue is whether expropriation for a road construction project established by an isolated road development plan is permissible solely on the basis of § 85(1) No. 1 of the German Building Code (BauGB), rather than requiring a separate expropriation plan or different statutory grounds. The court determined that this question is of fundamental importance for legal certainty and requires clarification by the revision court.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 85 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 BauGB, § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und Abs. 3, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG; Admissibility of expropriation under § 85(1) No. 1 BauGB for road projects based on isolated road development plans: The dispute concerns the validity of a compulsory expropriation measure conducted under a standalone road development plan, where the landowners challenged the legal basis for the expropriation. The decisive legal issue is whether expropriation for a road construction project established by an isolated road development plan is permissible solely on the basis of § 85(1) No. 1 of the German Building Code (BauGB), rather than requiring a separate expropriation plan or different statutory grounds. The court determined that this question is of fundamental importance for legal certainty and requires clarification by the revision court.

Keywords

AI generated
expropriation plan road construction project validity of building permit revision of a judgment building plan statutory grounds

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 85 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 BauGB
Revisionszulassung; Enteignung nach § 85 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 BauGB im Rahmen eines Straßenbebauungsplans
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Basis for allowing the revision because the case contributes to clarifying an important legal question.
§ 52 Abs. 1 GKG
3, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG, die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren auf § 47 Abs.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.
§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und Abs. 3, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG
Basis for the fee determination in the appeal proceedings.
§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Basis for the preliminary fee determination in the revision proceedings.
AI generated
4 B 11/11, 4 B 11/11 (4 C 7/11)
Sufficiency of § 85(1) No. 1 BauGB for expropriation based solely on an isolated road development plan
4 C 6/11
Exclusivity of urban planning expropriation over public law provisions for isolated road development plans
4 C 7/11
Exclusivity of urban planning expropriation under § 85 BauGB when land is designated in an isolated street development plan, barring state road law expropriation.
9 C 14/11
Standing to challenge highway plan approval: expropriatory prior effect extends to property rights secured by Auflassungsvormerkung
9 C 1/19
Exclusion of Development Contribution Liability for Roads Constructed Under a Project Development and Infrastructure Plan

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Basis for allowing the revision because the case contributes to clarifying an important legal question.

§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und Abs. 3, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG

Basis for the fee determination in the appeal proceedings.

§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Basis for the preliminary fee determination in the revision proceedings.

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; Enteignung nach § 85 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 BauGB im Rahmen eines Straßenbebauungsplans

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerden sind begründet. Die Revision ist nach § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO zuzulassen, weil das Revisionsverfahren zur Klärung der Frage beitragen kann, ob eine Enteignung für ein Straßenbauvorhaben, das durch einen isolierten Straßenbebauungsplan festgesetzt worden ist, allein auf der Grundlage des § 85 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 BauGB zulässig ist.

Die Streitwertfestsetzung für das Beschwerdeverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und Abs. 3, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG, die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren auf § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG. Der festgesetzte Betrag entspricht demjenigen, den der Beigeladene zu 1 in dem angefochtenen Bescheid als zu erwartende Gesamtentschädigung ermittelt hat. Eine Reduzierung, wie sie das Verwaltungsgericht in seinem Streitwertbeschluss vom 6. Mai 2009 vorgenommen hat, ist nicht angezeigt. Der Senat pflegt einen Abschlag nur vorzunehmen, wenn die angefochtene Maßnahme enteignungsrechtliche Vorwirkung hat, die Enteignung aber - anders als vorliegend - noch nicht zum Gegenstand hat (vgl. Beschluss vom 6. Juni 2002 - BVerwG 4 A 44.00 -).