Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
9 BN 4/13, 9 BN 4/13 (9 CN 1/14) AI generated

Admissibility of revision to develop jurisprudence on binding effect of land readjustment plan determinations

Case Number 9 BN 4/13, 9 BN 4/13 (9 CN 1/14)
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 appeal on points of law in favor of the applicants, ruling that their complaint was admissible and well-founded because the case possessed fundamental legal significance. The dispute concerned the binding legal effect of specific determinations made within a land readjustment plan (Flurbereinigungsplan) under German agricultural law. The court based its decision on § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, granting leave to appeal to allow the BVerwG to develop its jurisprudence regarding § 58 Abs. 4 of the Land Readjustment Act (FlurbG), while the provisional amount in controversy for the proceedings was established pursuant to §§ 47, 52, and 63 GKG.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 52 Abs. 2 GKG; Admissibility of revision to develop jurisprudence on binding effect of land readjustment plan determinations: The dispute concerned the binding legal effect of specific determinations made within a land readjustment plan (Flurbereinigungsplan) under German agricultural law. The court based its decision on § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, granting leave to appeal to allow the BVerwG to develop its jurisprudence regarding § 58 Abs. 4 of the Land Readjustment Act (FlurbG), while the provisional amount in controversy for the proceedings was established pursuant to §§ 47, 52, and 63 GKG.

Keywords

AI generated
land law revision proceedings agricultural land revision of zoning plan administrative complaint effects of a preliminary ruling

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Grounds for the admission of the revision due to the case's fundamental legal significance.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Provision cited for the provisional calculation of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.
§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Provision cited for the provisional calculation of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.
§ 52 Abs. 2 GKG
Provision cited for the provisional calculation of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.
AI generated
9 B 44/19
Invalidity of land readjustment settlement due to hidden dissent or revocable error and objective interpretation of plan amendments
8 B 23/23
Land readjustment allocation finality and right to property when prior individual challenges were settled
9 B 88/09
Land readjustment: modification of farm and building plots under § 45 Abs. 1 Satz 1 Nr. 1 FlurbG to align legal boundaries with actual possession
9 B 43/19
Judicial settlement in land readjustment: immediate plan amendment via land waiver versus conditional obligation and revocation for error
4 BN 46/21
Substantive effect of textual amendments to draft land-use plans: Mandatory re-consultation under § 4a Abs. 3 BauGB depends on regulatory content, not timing or pending litigation

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Grounds for the admission of the revision due to the case's fundamental legal significance.

§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Provision cited for the provisional calculation of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.

§ 52 Abs. 2 GKG

Provision cited for the provisional calculation of the amount in dispute for the revision proceedings.

§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Provision cited for the provisional calculation of the amount in dispute for 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; Festsetzungen im Flurbereinigungsplan

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerde der Antragsteller ist zulässig und begründet. Die Revision ist gemäß § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung zuzulassen. Sie kann dem Bundesverwaltungsgericht Gelegenheit geben, seine Rechtsprechung zu § 58 Abs. 4 FlurbG fortzuentwickeln.

Die vorläufige Festsetzung des Streitwertes für das Revisionsverfahren folgt aus § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 2, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.