Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
2 B 13/13, 2 B 13/13 (2 C 10/14) AI generated

Damages for unlawful failure to promote: treatment of budgetary line-item notes in hypothetical causality

Case Number 2 B 13/13, 2 B 13/13 (2 C 10/14)
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 allowed the appeal on points of law (Revision), determining that the legal question presented possesses fundamental significance. The dispute concerns a claim for damages due to the unlawful failure to promote a civil servant, specifically challenging whether and how to account for potentially unlawful budgetary line-item notes (Stellenvermerks) that link certain retention periods to the deployment of aggregated staff positions when establishing the hypothetical causal chain of events. The decision is based on § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, which permits admission of appeal where a legal question of general importance requires clarification by the highest administrative court.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 71 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 13 GKG, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG; Damages for unlawful failure to promote: treatment of budgetary line-item notes in hypothetical causality: The dispute concerns a claim for damages due to the unlawful failure to promote a civil servant, specifically challenging whether and how to account for potentially unlawful budgetary line-item notes (Stellenvermerks) that link certain retention periods to the deployment of aggregated staff positions when establishing the hypothetical causal chain of events. The decision is based on § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, which permits admission of appeal where a legal question of general importance requires clarification by the highest administrative court.

Keywords

AI generated
provisions on promotion administrative complaint civil dispute grounds for revision causal link accounting provision

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
The provision cited as the main ground for allowing the appeal on points of law due to the fundamental significance of the legal question.
§ 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
The provision cited for the provisional determination of the subject matter value for the revision procedure.
AI generated
2 B 15/13, 2 B 15/13 (2 C 12/14)
Hypothetical causality in damages claims for unlawful non-promotion and the consideration of budgetary position notes linking deployment to retention periods
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 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
2 C 12/14
Damages for delayed civil servant promotion contingent on hypothetical promotion chance under budgetary constraints
2 B 63/14
Employee damages for failed promotion: Incompatibility of unverified official assurance with adequate causation doctrine

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

The provision cited as the main ground for allowing the appeal on points of law due to the fundamental significance of the legal question.

§ 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.

The procedural provisions applied to determine the subject matter value for the complaint procedure.

§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

The provision cited for the provisional determination of the subject matter value 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

Schadensersatz wegen unterlassener Beförderung; Berücksichtigung eines Stellenvermerks des Haushaltsplans; Revisionszulassung

[GRUENDE]

Die zulässige Beschwerde des Klägers 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.