Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
7 B 29/18, 7 B 29/18 (7 C 5/19) ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2019:260619B7B29.18.0 Généré par l'IA

Admissibility of appeal based on fundamental significance of determining when Freedom of Information Act requests constitute abuse of rights

Numéro de cause 7 B 29/18, 7 B 29/18 (7 C 5/19)
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 (BVerwG) granted the defendant's complaint and admitted an appeal on points of law to the same court, ruling that the case has fundamental legal significance. The dispute concerns a challenge to the permissibility of information access requests under the Federal Freedom of Information Act (IFG), specifically addressing whether such requests can constitute an abuse of rights (*Rechtsmissbrauch*). The decisive legal basis for the admission is § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, which allows for appeal when a case clarifies a fundamental question of law; here, the court determined that it can clarify the conditions under which IFG requests are abusive, while the dispute value was set according to §§ 47, 52, and 63 GKG.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, § 52 Abs. 2 GKG, § 63 Abs. 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG, § 47 Abs. 3 GKG; Admissibility of appeal based on fundamental significance of determining when Freedom of Information Act requests constitute abuse of rights: The dispute concerns a challenge to the permissibility of information access requests under the Federal Freedom of Information Act (IFG), specifically addressing whether such requests can constitute an abuse of rights (*Rechtsmissbrauch*). The decisive legal basis for the admission is § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO, which allows for appeal when a case clarifies a fundamental question of law; here, the court determined that it can clarify the conditions under which IFG requests are abusive, while the dispute value was set according to §§ 47, 52, and 63 GKG.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
accès aux documents officiels droits procéduraux droits fondamentaux recours contre des décisions administratives valeur litigieuse État de droit

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO
Main ground for the admission of the appeal on points of law, citing fundamental significance.
§ 52 Abs. 2 GKG
Cost provision cited in the dispositive for the determination of the dispute value in both proceedings.
§ 63 Abs. 1 GKG
Cost provision cited in the dispositive for the determination of the dispute value in the appeal proceedings.
§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG
Procedural rule applied in the dispositive for the determination of the dispute value in the complaint and appeal proceedings.
§ 47 Abs. 3 GKG
Procedural rule applied in the dispositive for the determination of the dispute value in the complaint proceedings.
Généré par l'IA
7 B 20/14, 7 B 20/14 (7 C 2/15)
Admissibility of revision on the exclusion grounds and scope of application of the Freedom of Information Act (IFG)
10 C 12/19
IFG information access: abuse of rights exception and non-attribution of counsel’s out-of-scope mass-litigation conduct
20 F 8/12
Freedom of Information Act access to collegiate body minutes: decision-relevance prerequisite for intermediate proceedings on evidentiary access.
6 B 28/22
Insufficiency of reasoning for refusing BVerfSchG information request due to risk of source endangerment and operational exposure.
10 C 13/19
Information freedom access claim: abuse of rights defense and imputation of attorney’s mass-litigation conduct to client

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

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

Main ground for the admission of the appeal on points of law, citing fundamental significance.

§ 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG

Procedural rule applied in the dispositive for the determination of the dispute value in the complaint and appeal proceedings.

§ 47 Abs. 3 GKG

Procedural rule applied in the dispositive for the determination of the dispute value in the complaint proceedings.

§ 52 Abs. 2 GKG

Cost provision cited in the dispositive for the determination of the dispute value in both proceedings.

§ 63 Abs. 1 GKG

Cost provision cited in the dispositive for the determination of the dispute value in the appeal proceedings.

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; Rechtsmissbrauch von Anträgen auf Informationszugang nach dem Informationsfreiheitsgesetz des Bundes (IFG)

[GRUENDE]

Die Beschwerde der Beklagten ist begründet. Die Rechtssache hat grundsätzliche Bedeutung im Sinne des § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO.

Das Verfahren kann dem Senat voraussichtlich Gelegenheit zur Klärung der Frage geben, unter welchen Voraussetzungen Anträge auf Informationszugang nach dem Informationsfreiheitsgesetz des Bundes (IFG) rechtsmissbräuchlich sein können.

Die Festsetzung des Streitwerts beruht für das Beschwerdeverfahren auf § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1 und Abs. 3, § 52 Abs. 2 GKG, für das Revisionsverfahren auf § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 1, § 52 Abs. 2, § 63 Abs. 1 GKG.