Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
6 B 53/12, 6 B 53/12 (6 C 10/13) AI generated

Dependency of final telecommunications fee authorization on prior consultation and consolidation proceedings

Case Number 6 B 53/12, 6 B 53/12 (6 C 10/13)
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) admitted the plaintiff's appeal against the non-admission of revision, granting the plaintiff a path to judicial review on questions of fundamental significance. The dispute concerned a telecommunications fee approval procedure, specifically challenging whether the Federal Network Agency could condition the final grant of a fee authorization on the prior completion of consultation and consolidation proceedings. The court found that the case met the criteria for fundamental importance under § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, requiring clarification on the interplay between the final fee approval, the consultation processes under § 12 TKG, and the statutory deadline for provisional authorizations under the old Telecommunications Act. Consequently, the court ordered that the matter proceed to revision, setting the dispute value for both the appeal and subsequent revision stages based on the respective provisions of the Court Costs Act (GKG).

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 und 3, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1, § 52 Abs. 1, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG; Dependency of final telecommunications fee authorization on prior consultation and consolidation proceedings: The dispute concerned a telecommunications fee approval procedure, specifically challenging whether the Federal Network Agency could condition the final grant of a fee authorization on the prior completion of consultation and consolidation proceedings. The court found that the case met the criteria for fundamental importance under § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, requiring clarification on the interplay between the final fee approval, the consultation processes under § 12 TKG, and the statutory deadline for provisional authorizations under the old Telecommunications Act. Consequently, the court ordered that the matter proceed to revision, setting the dispute value for both the appeal and subsequent revision stages based on the respective provisions of the Court Costs Act (GKG).

Keywords

AI generated
administrative fee consultation procedure approval procedure revision of a judgment matter in dispute judicial review

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Legal basis for admitting the appeal due to the fundamental significance of the legal questions.
§ 52 Abs. 1 GKG
1 und 3, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG; die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
1, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.
§ 47 Abs. 1 und 3, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG
Basis for the determination of the amount in dispute in the appeal proceedings.
§ 47 Abs. 1, § 52 Abs. 1, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Basis for the provisional determination of the amount in dispute in the revision proceedings.
AI generated
6 C 3/11
Conflict between overlapping telecom fee approvals and the requirement for formal revocation of prior authorization
6 B 11/19
Binding effect of final regulatory order on fee approval methods despite alleged illegality in telecommunications network interconnection fees
6 B 25/20
Admissibility of revision appeal against annulment of telecommunications fee approval: independent legal grounds and requirement to challenge each self-sustaining basis
6 B 9/19
Binding effect of a final but substantively defective telecommunications regulatory order on subsequent fee approval methodology
6 B 5/15, 6 B 5/15 (6 C 24/15)
Telecommunications tariff authorization: contractual prerequisite for private-law effects under § 37(2) TKG

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Legal basis for admitting the appeal due to the fundamental significance of the legal questions.

§ 47 Abs. 1 und 3, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG

Basis for the determination of the amount in dispute in the appeal proceedings.

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

Basis for the provisional determination of the amount in dispute 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; Entgeltgenehmigung; Konsultationsverfahren; Konsolidierungsverfahren

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerde der Klägerin gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision ist begründet. Die Rechtssache hat die geltend gemachte grundsätzliche Bedeutung (§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO). Sie kann zur Klärung der Fragen beitragen, ob die Bundesnetzagentur berechtigt ist, die endgültige Entscheidung über die Erteilung einer Entgeltgenehmigung von der vorherigen Durchführung eines Konsultations- und Konsolidierungsverfahrens (§ 12 TKG) abhängig zu machen und ob der Erlass einer vorläufigen Entgeltgenehmigung zur Wahrung der Entscheidungsfrist des § 31 Abs. 6 Satz 3 des Telekommunikationsgesetzes in der bis zum Inkrafttreten des Gesetzes vom 3. Mai 2012 (BGBl I S. 958) geltenden Fassung (TKG a.F.) ausreicht.

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