Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
6 PB 16/11, 6 PB 16/11 (6 P 1/12) AI generated

Recovery of attorney's fees for youth representative in dismissal dispute under non-discrimination principle

Case Number 6 PB 16/11, 6 PB 16/11 (6 P 1/12)
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Germany (DE)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The BVerwG 6th Senate admitted the applicant’s legal complaint and ordered the continuation of the proceeding under a new case number, effectively allowing the public servant to challenge the lower court’s decision and restart the two-month deadline for substantiating the appeal. The dispute concerned whether a youth representative acting for a public servant who successfully defended against an employer’s request to dissolve an employment relationship under § 9 Abs. 4 Satz 1 Nr. 2 BPersVG could claim reimbursement of attorney’s fees incurred in the legal complaint instance based on the principle of non-discrimination. The decision relies on §§ 83 Abs. 2 NdsPersVG, 72 Abs. 2 Nr. 1, and 92 Abs. 1 Satz 2 ArbGG for admission, while the underlying substantive issue centers on the application of the constitutional prohibition of disadvantage to the recoverability of procedural legal costs in labor court proceedings.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 92 Abs. 1 Satz 2 ArbGG, § 92a Satz 2 ArbGG; Recovery of attorney's fees for youth representative in dismissal dispute under non-discrimination principle: The dispute concerned whether a youth representative acting for a public servant who successfully defended against an employer’s request to dissolve an employment relationship under § 9 Abs. 4 Satz 1 Nr. 2 BPersVG could claim reimbursement of attorney’s fees incurred in the legal complaint instance based on the principle of non-discrimination. The decision relies on §§ 83 Abs. 2 NdsPersVG, 72 Abs. 2 Nr. 1, and 92 Abs. 1 Satz 2 ArbGG for admission, while the underlying substantive issue centers on the application of the constitutional prohibition of disadvantage to the recoverability of procedural legal costs in labor court proceedings.

Keywords

AI generated
legal fees prohibition of discrimination cost-recovery principle standing to appeal employment relationship constitutional principle

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 92 Abs. 1 Satz 2 ArbGG
1, § 92 Abs. 1 Satz 2 ArbGG zuzulassen.
§ 92a Satz 2 ArbGG
2 Satz 1, § 92a Satz 2 ArbGG).
AI generated
6 P 1/12
Reimbursement of appellate legal costs to youth representative under the prohibition of disadvantage in personnel representation law following successful defense against dissolution of employment
3 AZB 22/11
Recoverability of full attorney fee for non-admission complaint intervention filed before service of rejecting decision
10 AZB 43/15
Recovery of statutory attorney fees despite available free union representation in German labor appellate proceedings
VII ZR 49/20
Setting of attorney fee value for non-admission complaint based on full appellate aggrievement under § 33 RVG
VII ZR 124/25
Contractual compensation claims; inadmissibility of non-admission complaint due to insufficient amount in dispute and denial of statutory attorney appointment following counsel withdrawal

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 83 Abs. 2 NdsPersVG i.V.m. § 72 Abs. 2 Nr. 1, § 92 Abs. 1 Satz 2 ArbGG

Legal basis for admitting the legal complaint (Rechtsbeschwerde) and continuing the proceeding.

§ 72a Abs. 6, § 74 Abs. 1, § 92 Abs. 2 Satz 1, § 92a Satz 2 ArbGG

Procedural rules governing the start of the two-month deadline for substantiating the legal complaint upon delivery of the decision.

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

Anwaltskosten des Jugendvertreters im Rechtsbeschwerdeverfahren

[GRUENDE]

Die Rechtsbeschwerde des Antragstellers ist gemäß § 83 Abs. 2 NdsPersVG i.V.m. § 72 Abs. 2 Nr. 1, § 92 Abs. 1 Satz 2 ArbGG zuzulassen. Die vorliegende Rechtssache gibt dem Senat Gelegenheit, zu der Frage Stellung zu nehmen, ob der Jugendvertreter, der sich in der Rechtsbeschwerdeinstanz gegen das Auflösungsbegehren des öffentlichen Arbeitgebers nach § 9 Abs. 4 Satz 1 Nr. 2 BPersVG erfolgreich zur Wehr gesetzt hat, seine im Rechtsbeschwerdeverfahren entstandenen Anwaltskosten unter dem Gesichtspunkt des Benachteiligungsverbots von der Dienststelle erstattet verlangen kann.

Das Beschwerdeverfahren wird nunmehr als Rechtsbeschwerdeverfahren unter dem Aktenzeichen BVerwG 6 P 1.12 fortgesetzt. Mit der Zustellung dieses Beschlusses beginnt die Rechtsbeschwerdebegründungsfrist von 2 Monaten (§ 72a Abs. 6, § 74 Abs. 1, § 92 Abs. 2 Satz 1, § 92a Satz 2 ArbGG).