Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
2 B 15/13, 2 B 15/13 (2 C 12/14) AI generated

Hypothetical causality in damages claims for unlawful non-promotion and the consideration of budgetary position notes linking deployment to retention periods

Case Number 2 B 15/13, 2 B 15/13 (2 C 12/14)
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 (2nd Senate) granted the plaintiff's complaint and ordered that leave to appeal be granted for the case to proceed to revision, as the legal question at issue is of fundamental significance. The dispute concerns a claim for damages based on the allegedly unlawful failure to promote the plaintiff within the civil service. The specific legal issue requiring clarification is whether and how the hypothetical causal chain should be assessed, specifically whether the provisions of a budgetary position note—which link the deployment of consolidated positions to certain retention periods and may themselves be unlawful—must be taken into account in this analysis. The decision relies on § 132(2) No. 1 VwGO for the admission of the appeal due to fundamental legal significance, with the value in dispute determined according to the fees rules in the GKG.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 71 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 13 GKG, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG; Hypothetical causality in damages claims for unlawful non-promotion and the consideration of budgetary position notes linking deployment to retention periods: The dispute concerns a claim for damages based on the allegedly unlawful failure to promote the plaintiff within the civil service. The specific legal issue requiring clarification is whether and how the hypothetical causal chain should be assessed, specifically whether the provisions of a budgetary position note—which link the deployment of consolidated positions to certain retention periods and may themselves be unlawful—must be taken into account in this analysis. The decision relies on § 132(2) No. 1 VwGO for the admission of the appeal due to fundamental legal significance, with the value in dispute determined according to the fees rules in the GKG.

Keywords

AI generated
assessment of legal causality decisions on promotion non-administrative dispute civil service budgetary rules accounting provision

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Basis for admitting the appeal for revision due to the fundamental significance of the legal issue.
§ 71 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Die Streitwertfestsetzung für das Beschwerdeverfahren folgt aus § 71 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG i.V.m.
§ 13 GKG
September 2002 - BVerwG 2 B 23.02 - Buchholz 360 § 13 GKG Nr.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Basis for the provisional determination of the amount in dispute for the revision procedure.
AI generated
2 B 14/13, 2 B 14/13 (2 C 11/14)
Hypothetical causality in damages claims for unlawful non-promotion: accounting for budget place-of-service note dwell-time restrictions in bundle position allocation
2 B 13/13, 2 B 13/13 (2 C 10/14)
Damages for unlawful failure to promote: treatment of budgetary line-item notes in hypothetical causality
2 BvR 811/09
Causality standard for secondary damages claims in civil service promotion disputes under Art. 33(2) GG
2 C 12/14
Damages for delayed civil servant promotion contingent on hypothetical promotion chance under budgetary constraints
2 C 10/14
Damages for delayed police promotion: causality despite unlawful tenure-based selection restriction under Article 33(2) Basic Law and budgetary position limits

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Basis for admitting the appeal for revision due to the fundamental significance of the legal issue.

§ 71 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG i.V.m. § 40, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und Abs. 3 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 5 Satz 2 i.V.m. Satz 1 Nr. 1 GKG a.F.

Basis for the determination of the amount in dispute for the complaint procedure.

§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Basis for the provisional determination of 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

Die zulässige Beschwerde der Klägerin ist begründet. Die Revision ist gemäß § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung der Rechtssache zuzulassen. Sie kann dem Bundesverwaltungsgericht Gelegenheit zur Klärung der Frage geben, ob und ggf. wie bei einer Klage auf Schadensersatz wegen rechtswidrig unterlassener Beförderung im Rahmen der Ermittlung des hypothetischen Kausalverlaufs die - möglicherweise rechtswidrigen, weil an bestimmte Verweilzeiten anknüpfenden - Vorgaben eines Stellenvermerks des Haushaltsplans bei der Ausbringung gebündelter Stellen zu berücksichtigen sind.

Die Streitwertfestsetzung für das Beschwerdeverfahren folgt aus § 71 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG i.V.m. § 40, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und Abs. 3 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 5 Satz 2 i.V.m. Satz 1 Nr. 1 GKG a.F. (Beschluss vom 26. September 2002 - BVerwG 2 B 23.02 - Buchholz 360 § 13 GKG Nr. 114 S. 10); die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung des Streitwerts für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.