Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
9 B 87/11, 9 B 87/11 (9 C 3/12) AI generated

Constitutional validity of by-law requirement that final road completion meets current, not construction-time, technical standards under § 132 Nr. 4 BauGB

Case Number 9 B 87/11, 9 B 87/11 (9 C 3/12)
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) granted the plaintiffs' complaint against the non-admission of revision, allowing the case to proceed to a final judgment on the merits. The dispute centers on the interpretation of a subdivision contribution by-law (Erschließungsbeitragssatzung), specifically whether the "final completion" of a road's carriageway requires an upgrade to the technical standard currently in force at the time of assessment, consistent with guidelines for the standardization of the structural layers of traffic surfaces, rather than the standard applicable at the time of initial construction. The decisive legal issue is whether such a by-law provision, as construed by the appellate court, is compatible with § 132 Nr. 4 of the German Building Code (BauGB), which governs the assessment of contributions for public facilities.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 132 Nr. 4 BauGB, § 52 Abs. 3 GKG, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 und 3 in Verbindung mit § 52 Abs. 3 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 in Verbindung mit § 52 Abs. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG; Constitutional validity of by-law requirement that final road completion meets current, not construction-time, technical standards under § 132 Nr. 4 BauGB: The dispute centers on the interpretation of a subdivision contribution by-law (Erschließungsbeitragssatzung), specifically whether the "final completion" of a road's carriageway requires an upgrade to the technical standard currently in force at the time of assessment, consistent with guidelines for the standardization of the structural layers of traffic surfaces, rather than the standard applicable at the time of initial construction. The decisive legal issue is whether such a by-law provision, as construed by the appellate court, is compatible with § 132 Nr. 4 of the German Building Code (BauGB), which governs the assessment of contributions for public facilities.

Keywords

AI generated
road construction constitutional requirement road traffic law revision of a judgment validity of building permit matter in dispute

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Basis for allowing the complaint against the non-admission of revision due to the matter having fundamental significance.
§ 132 Nr. 4 BauGB
§ 52 Abs. 3 GKG
1 und 3 in Verbindung mit § 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 in Verbindung mit § 52 Abs. 3 GKG
Provisional basis for determining the amount in dispute for the complaint procedure.
§ 47 Abs. 1 in Verbindung mit § 52 Abs. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Provisional basis for determining the amount in dispute for the revision procedure.
AI generated
9 C 3/12
Development contribution: Invalid bylaw reference to dynamic technical standards negates "final construction" of road surface
9 B 10/17
Arising of road construction contribution liability upon post-completion dedication: compatibility of retroactive effect with the rule of law principle and prohibition of arbitrariness
9 C 25/15
Pre-unification partial road completion not shielded from development contributions; post-unification section delineation cannot retroactively satisfy transitional bar
9 B 81/14
Municipal road construction charges: admissibility of challenging a change in legal interpretation on grounds of legitimate expectations and legal certainty
9 B 60/11
Revisibility of Abgabenordnung provisions incorporated into state law via reference in development contribution disputes

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Basis for allowing the complaint against the non-admission of revision due to the matter having fundamental significance.

§ 47 Abs. 1 und 3 in Verbindung mit § 52 Abs. 3 GKG

Provisional basis for determining the amount in dispute for the complaint procedure.

§ 47 Abs. 1 in Verbindung mit § 52 Abs. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Provisional basis for determining the amount in dispute for the 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

Merkmale der endgültigen Herstellung einer Erschließungsanlage; Regelung durch Satzung

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerde der Kläger 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, ob die Regelung einer Erschließungsbeitragssatzung in der Auslegung durch das Berufungsgericht, wonach die endgültige Herstellung der Straße bezüglich der Fahrbahndecke einen Ausbauzustand nach dem jeweils gültigen, den Richtlinien für die Standardisierung des Oberbaus von Verkehrsflächen entsprechenden technischen Standard voraussetzt, mit § 132 Nr. 4 BauGB vereinbar ist.

Die Streitwertfestsetzung für das Beschwerdeverfahren folgt aus § 47 Abs. 1 und 3 in Verbindung mit § 52 Abs. 3 GKG; die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1 in Verbindung mit § 52 Abs. 3, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.