Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
9 VR 1/10 Généré par l'IA

Ex officio suspension of immediately enforceable planning approval to avoid time-bound preliminary relief application

Numéro de cause 9 VR 1/10
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Allemagne (DE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige struck_off
Frais judiciaires à la charge de l'autorité
Ouvrir la source officielle Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The Federal Administrative Court (9th Senate) terminated the preliminary legal protection proceedings as moot after the parties declared the main action settled, and allocated the procedural costs to the respondent authority. The dispute concerned an application to suspend the enforcement of a statutory immediately enforceable planning approval decision (Planfeststellungsbeschluss) issued on December 17, 2009, where the applicant argued that immediate enforcement would cause irreparable harm. The Court ruled that the respondent had violated its duty of ex officio care by failing to suspend the enforcement of the planning decision, as it was already known at the time of issuance that the project owner would not commence execution until spring 2011; had the authority proactively suspended enforcement under § 80(4) sentence 1 of the Administrative Courts Act (VwGO), the applicants would have been relieved of the need to file this time-bound application within the one-month period prescribed by § 17e(2) sentence 2 of the Federal Highway Act (FStrG). The decision relies on §§ 92(3) and 161(2) VwGO for procedural termination and cost allocation based on equitable discretion, with the value in dispute set according to § 52(1) and § 53(2) no. 2 of the Court Costs Act (GKG).

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

§ 92 Abs. 3 VwGO, § 161 Abs. 2 VwGO, § 80 Abs. 4 Satz 1 VwGO, § 80 VwGO, § 53 Abs. 2 Nr. 2 GKG; Ex officio suspension of immediately enforceable planning approval to avoid time-bound preliminary relief application: The dispute concerned an application to suspend the enforcement of a statutory immediately enforceable planning approval decision (Planfeststellungsbeschluss) issued on December 17, 2009, where the applicant argued that immediate enforcement would cause irreparable harm. The Court ruled that the respondent had violated its duty of ex officio care by failing to suspend the enforcement of the planning decision, as it was already known at the time of issuance that the project owner would not commence execution until spring 2011; had the authority proactively suspended enforcement under § 80(4) sentence 1 of the Administrative Courts Act (VwGO), the applicants would have been relieved of the need to file this time-bound application within the one-month period prescribed by § 17e(2) sentence 2 of the Federal Highway Act (FStrG). The decision relies on §§ 92(3) and 161(2) VwGO for procedural termination and cost allocation based on equitable discretion, with the value in dispute set according to § 52(1) and § 53(2) no. 2 of the Court Costs Act (GKG).

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
requête en autorisation d'exécution - Décision approbation des plans décision préjudicielle clôture de la procédure délai de suspension règlement du litige

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
§ 92 Abs. 3 VwGO
Procedural basis cited to terminate the preliminary legal protection proceedings as moot.
§ 161 Abs. 2 VwGO
Legal basis cited for the court's authority to decide on the allocation of costs based on equitable discretion.
§ 80 Abs. 4 Satz 1 VwGO
§ 80 VwGO
September 2001 - BVerwG 4 VR 19.01 - Buchholz 310 § 80 VwGO Nr.
§ 53 Abs. 2 Nr. 2 GKG
1, § 53 Abs. 2 Nr. 2 GKG und entspricht der Hälfte der voraussichtlichen Streitwertfestsetzung im Klageverfahren.
Généré par l'IA
9 VR 2/24
Ex officio suspension of immediate enforceability of road plan approval pending litigation due to lack of imminent execution interest
9 VR 1/13
Interim relief: immediate enforceability of plan approval suspended where proponent voluntarily refrains from construction pending final decision
9 VR 3/13
Suspension of immediate enforceability of plan approval: balancing urgent execution against legal certainty under § 80 VwGO and § 4a UmwRG
9 VR 6/13
Immediate execution of supplementary planning approval for temporary highway infrastructure: balancing public execution interest against interim relief where construction is imminent and separability fails
9 VR 1/18, 9 VR 1/18 (9 A 2/18)
Urgent relief time limit: Subsequent planning amendment does not restart one-month deadline for suspending enforcement of road planning approval

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
§ 92 Abs. 3 VwGO

Procedural basis cited to terminate the preliminary legal protection proceedings as moot.

§ 161 Abs. 2 VwGO

Legal basis cited for the court's authority to decide on the allocation of costs based on equitable discretion.

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

Aussetzung der Vollziehung eines kraft Gesetzes sofort vollziehbaren Planfeststellungsbeschlusses; verzögerte Ausführung; Kostenentscheidung bei Hauptsachenerledigungserklärung

[GRUENDE]

Das Verfahren des vorläufigen Rechtsschutzes ist in entsprechender Anwendung von § 92 Abs. 3 VwGO einzustellen, nachdem die Beteiligten es mit Schriftsätzen vom 15. Juni 2010 und 30. Juni 2010 in der Hauptsache übereinstimmend für erledigt erklärt haben. Gemäß § 161 Abs. 2 VwGO ist über die Kosten des Verfahrens nach billigem Ermessen zu entscheiden; dabei ist der bisherige Sach- und Streitstand zu berücksichtigen.

Billigem Ermessen im Sinne dieser Vorschrift entspricht es, die Kosten dem Antragsgegner aufzuerlegen. Bei Erlass des von den Antragstellern angefochtenen Planfeststellungsbeschlusses am 17. Dezember 2009 war bereits bekannt, dass der Vorhabensträger mit dessen Ausführung nicht vor dem Frühjahr 2011 beginnen wird. In dieser Situation hätte es nahe gelegen, die Vollziehung des kraft Gesetzes sofort vollziehbaren Planfeststellungsbeschlusses gemäß § 80 Abs. 4 Satz 1 VwGO von Amts wegen behördlich auszusetzen, um die - für die Antragsteller ansonsten unausweichliche - Einleitung eines Verfahrens des vorläufigen Rechtsschutzes innerhalb der Einmonatsfrist nach § 17e Abs. 2 Satz 2 FStrG entbehrlich zu machen (vgl. Beschluss vom 17. September 2001 - BVerwG 4 VR 19.01 - Buchholz 310 § 80 VwGO Nr. 66 S. 2 ff.).

Die Streitwertfestsetzung beruht auf § 52 Abs. 1, § 53 Abs. 2 Nr. 2 GKG und entspricht der Hälfte der voraussichtlichen Streitwertfestsetzung im Klageverfahren.