Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
6 B 11/11, 6 B 11/11 (6 C 22/11) AI generated

State broadcasting law: constitutional limits on confiscating advertising revenues from unlawful broadcasts

Case Number 6 B 11/11, 6 B 11/11 (6 C 22/11)
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) ordered the admissibility of an appeal on the merits (Revision), thereby allowing the case to proceed to the next instance. The dispute concerns state broadcasting law, specifically the legality of a regulatory provision mandating the confiscation of advertising revenues generated by a broadcast deemed unlawful. The court's decision to grant the appeal relies on § 132(2)(1) of the Administrative Court Procedure Act (VwGO), citing that the case serves to clarify the insufficiently settled question of which requirements German federal constitutional law imposes on state broadcasting regulations that sanction broadcasters by seizing advertising income from illegal broadcasts.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 2 und Abs. 3 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 2 und Abs. 3 GKG; State broadcasting law: constitutional limits on confiscating advertising revenues from unlawful broadcasts: The dispute concerns state broadcasting law, specifically the legality of a regulatory provision mandating the confiscation of advertising revenues generated by a broadcast deemed unlawful. The court's decision to grant the appeal relies on § 132(2)(1) of the Administrative Court Procedure Act (VwGO), citing that the case serves to clarify the insufficiently settled question of which requirements German federal constitutional law imposes on state broadcasting regulations that sanction broadcasters by seizing advertising income from illegal broadcasts.

Keywords

AI generated
constitutional limits media law broadcasting right constitutional revision grounds for revision question of fundamental importance

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Main ground for the verdict, justifying the admissibility of the revision due to the fundamental importance of the legal dispute.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Die Streitwertfestsetzung für das Beschwerdeverfahren folgt aus § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 2 und Abs. 3 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 2 und Abs. 3 GKG; die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1 und 3, § 52 Abs. 2 und Abs. 3 GKG i.V.m. § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.
§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 2 und Abs. 3 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 2 und Abs. 3 GKG
Procedural rule applied in the dispositive to determine the final value in dispute for the appeal proceedings.
AI generated
6 C 22/11
Forfeiture of advertising revenue for broadcast violations: constitutional competence and proportionality of regulatory sanction
6 C 20/15
Wohnungsbezogener Rundfunkbeitrag als verfassungsgemäße nichtsteuerliche Abgabe statt gerätebasierter Gebühr
1 BvR 2020/04
Scope of editorial confidentiality in broadcast media: proportionality limits on seizing and copying editorial records during criminal searches
6 C 48/15
Wohnungsbezogener Rundfunkbeitrag als verfassungsmäßig zulässige nichtsteuerliche Abgabe
6 B 12/17
Constitutionality of the broadcasting fee as a non-tax surcharge: equal treatment of multiple apartment holders and exemption for devices-less households

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Main ground for the verdict, justifying the admissibility of the revision due to the fundamental importance of the legal dispute.

§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 2 und Abs. 3 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 2 und Abs. 3 GKG

Procedural rule applied in the dispositive to determine the final value in dispute for the appeal proceedings.

§ 47 Abs. 1 und 3, § 52 Abs. 2 und Abs. 3 GKG i.V.m. § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Procedural rule applied in the dispositive to establish the preliminary value in dispute.

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; Landesrundfunkrecht; Abschöpfung von Werbeeinnahmen

[GRUENDE]

Die Revision ist gemäß § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung des Rechtsstreits zuzulassen. Das angestrebte Revisionsverfahren kann zur Beantwortung der bisher in der Rechtsprechung des Bundesverwaltungsgerichts nicht ausreichend geklärten Frage beitragen, welche Anforderungen Bundesverfassungsrecht an eine Regelung des Landesrundfunkrechts stellt, die die Abschöpfung von Werbeeinnahmen vorsieht, die auf eine als rechtswidrig zu beanstandende Sendung entfallen.

Die Streitwertfestsetzung für das Beschwerdeverfahren folgt aus § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 2 und Abs. 3 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 2 und Abs. 3 GKG; die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1 und 3, § 52 Abs. 2 und Abs. 3 GKG i.V.m. § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.