Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
3 B 21/16, 3 B 21/16 (3 C 4/17) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2017:090217B3B21.16.0 Généré par l'IA

Licensing requirement under the Passenger Transport Act for patient transport operated by an outpatient rehabilitation facility

Numéro de cause 3 B 21/16, 3 B 21/16 (3 C 4/17)
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Allemagne (DE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Admis (Allowed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The Federal Administrative Court granted leave to appeal, finding that the case possesses fundamental significance, thereby allowing the subsequent full merits hearing to proceed. The dispute concerns the permissibility of a transport service operated by a provider of outpatient rehabilitation for transporting patients between their homes and the facility, specifically challenging the lower court's assessment of whether such a service constitutes a public passenger transport operation. The decisive legal question is whether a license under § 1(1) in conjunction with § 2(1) of the Passenger Transport Act (PBefG) is mandatory for this specific type of patient transport.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 GKG, § 52 Abs. 1 GKG; Licensing requirement under the Passenger Transport Act for patient transport operated by an outpatient rehabilitation facility: The dispute concerns the permissibility of a transport service operated by a provider of outpatient rehabilitation for transporting patients between their homes and the facility, specifically challenging the lower court's assessment of whether such a service constitutes a public passenger transport operation. The decisive legal question is whether a license under § 1(1) in conjunction with § 2(1) of the Passenger Transport Act (PBefG) is mandatory for this specific type of patient transport.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
transport public centre de réadaptation audience publique nécessité de soins médicaux autorisation générale usage d'un véhicule automobile

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Ground for granting leave to appeal due to fundamental significance of the case.
§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Basis for the imposition of court fees in the revision procedure.
§ 47 Abs. 1 GKG
Basis for the preliminary determination of the matter in dispute for the revision procedure.
§ 52 Abs. 1 GKG
Basis for the calculation of court fees for the revision procedure.
Généré par l'IA
10 C 1/19
Patient transport service: licensing requirement and scope of “own vehicles” and “inpatient” exemptions under PBefG and FrStllgV
IV R 37/19
Scope of vehicle tax exemption for patient transport: medical necessity via prescription without requirement for on-board medical care or emergency response
IV R 41/19
Tax exemption for patient transport vehicles: sufficiency of medical prescriptions and exclusion of en-route care requirements
III R 47/18
Kraftfahrzeugsteuer: Krankenbeförderung requires medically ill passengers and treatment-related transport, not just disability
5 C 14/19
Reimbursement of travel costs for medical treatment requires a specific physician's order for transport, not just a treatment certificate, even when using a private vehicle.

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO

Ground for granting leave to appeal due to fundamental significance of the case.

§ 47 Abs. 1 GKG

Basis for the preliminary determination of the matter in dispute for the revision procedure.

§ 52 Abs. 1 GKG

Basis for the calculation of court fees for the revision procedure.

§ 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Basis for the imposition of court fees in the revision procedure.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet

Revisionszulassung; Erforderlichkeit einer Genehmigung für Fahrdienst

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerde hat Erfolg. Der Rechtssache kommt grundsätzliche Bedeutung im Sinne von § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO zu. Das Revisionsverfahren wird dem Bundesverwaltungsgericht voraussichtlich Gelegenheit zur Klärung der Frage geben, wann für einen Fahrdienst, den der Träger einer Einrichtung für ambulante Rehabilitation für den Transport der Patienten zwischen deren Wohnung und der Rehabilitationseinrichtung betreibt, eine Genehmigung nach § 1 Abs. 1 i.V.m. § 2 Abs. 1 des Personenbeförderungsgesetzes erforderlich ist.

Die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung für das Revisionsverfahren beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1, § 52 Abs. 1 und § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.