Search in ‘Judgments and decisions’

Judgment of 28 April 2016 - BVerwG 4 A 2.15 (uploaded on 16 November 2017)


1. Section 49 of the Administrative Procedure Act (VwVfG, Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetz) also applies to planning approval decisions under aviation law (luftverkehrsrechtliche Planfeststellungsbeschlüsse). Third parties may demand that such an act be revoked, or that a discretionary decision be taken in its regard, only if the obligations as to protection stipulated by section 75 (2) second sentence of the Administrative Procedure Act do not suffice to remedy the situation.

2. A modified assessment of the given facts and circumstances may constitute a change in the factual situation in the sense of section 49 (2) first sentence no. 3 of the Administrative Procedure Act. Individual opinions that thus far have not found general acceptance in the scientific community are not a sufficient basis for doing so.

Judgment of 27 April 2016 - BVerwG 1 C 24.15 (uploaded on 09 August 2016)

Claim for compliance with Dublin responsibility provisions in the absence of willingness to take charge or take back on the part of a Member State that does not have responsibility


If a Member State is responsible for carrying out an asylum procedure under the relevant terms of the Dublin Regulations, an applicant may in any event invoke that Member State’s responsibility in court proceedings against a rejection of his or her application for asylum as inadmissible under section 27a Asylum Act if it has not been positively established that another Member State (which does not have responsibility) is willing to take charge of the applicant or take him or her back.

Judgment of 07 April 2016 - BVerwG 4 C 1.15 (uploaded on 16 November 2017)

Construction ban in the case of interference with air traffic control services (ATCS) facilities by building structures


The decision incumbent on the Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Traffic Control (Bundesaufsichtsamt für Flugsicherung) under section 18a (1) second sentence of the German Aviation Act (LuftVG, Luftverkehrsgesetz) concerning whether the erection of building structures may interfere with air traffic control services facilities is not an administrative act.

A construction ban under section 18a (1) of the German Aviation Act is not dependent on certainty that there is interference with air traffic control services facilities; the possibility of interference is sufficient. This possibility exists if the relevant assumptions in the air traffic control services operator’s expert opinion and the decision of the Federal Supervisory Authority for Air Traffic Control based thereon meet scientific standards and their basic assumptions, methodology and conclusions are not called into question by opposing scientific standpoints, at least not in substance.

Judgment of 06 April 2016 - BVerwG 3 C 10.14 (uploaded on 16 November 2017)

Permission for self-cultivation of cannabis for therapeutic purposes  


1. Self-cultivation of cannabis for therapeutic purposes is in the public interest within the meaning of section 3 (2) of the Narcotic Drugs Act (BtMG, Betäubungsmittelgesetz) if the applicant suffers from a severe disease and there is no equally effective and affordable drug available to him to treat his disease.

2. If no compelling grounds for refusal according to section 5 of the Narcotic Drugs Act exist in such a case, it is legally mandatory to make use of the discretion provided under section 3 (2) of the Narcotic Drugs Act by granting permission on the grounds of the protection of physical integrity required by article 2 (2) first sentence of the Basic Law.

Judgment of 06 April 2016 - BVerwG 3 C 10.15 (uploaded on 16 November 2017)

Legal effect of traffic signs according to the principle of visibility


Traffic signs for stationary traffic have legal effect for every road user affected by the regulation, regardless of whether the road user actually perceives the traffic sign or not, if the signs are placed or mounted in such a manner that an average motorist exercising due care in accordance with section 1 of the Road Traffic Regulation (Straßenverkehrsordnung) and in undisturbed visibility conditions can easily see while driving or by simply looking around upon leaving the vehicle that a requirement or prohibition has been made public by means of traffic signs. The motorist is only obliged to make a closer inspection if there is a specific reason to do so under the particular circumstances of the individual case.

Judgment of 23 March 2016 - BVerwG 10 C 4.15 (uploaded on 17 November 2017)


1. Chambers of industry and commerce are entitled to unite in a private-law umbrella association in order to jointly pursue the overall interests of their member businesses on a supra-regional level. However they are not entitled to delegate the task of pursuing the overall interests of member businesses to the umbrella association. Even if the umbrella association fulfils joint tasks, each chamber remains responsible for making sure that the competence framework pursuant to section 1 (1) of the Law on the Provisional Legislative Regulation of Chambers of Industry and Commerce (IHKG, Gesetz zur vorläufigen Regelung des Rechts der Industrie- und Handelskammern) is not exceeded.

2. Pursuant to article 2 (1) of the Basic Law (GG, Grundgesetz) a compulsory member of a chamber is entitled to demand its chamber’s withdrawal from the umbrella association if the latter fulfils tasks outside of the chamber’s legal competences. It is sufficient that the association exceeds the chambers’ competence framework with factual activities unless such a transgression is an isolated case atypical for the activities of the association. There has to be a concrete danger that the association will again become active outside of chamber competences.

Judgment of 20 January 2016 - BVerwG 10 C 24.14 (uploaded on 17 November 2017)


1. The prohibition against performing commercial activities in addition to the activity as a public accountant is compatible with the law of the European Union and German constitutional law.

2. Activity in a management body of a corporation falls under the prohibition against commercial activity within the meaning of sec. 43a (3) no. 1 of the German Public Accountant Act (Wirtschaftsprüferordnung).

Judgment of 10 Dezember 2015 - BVerwG 3 C 7.14 (uploaded on 16 November 2017)

Use of vegetable concentrates with high nitrate content as food additives in the production of meat


Concentrates of vegetables with high nitrate content that are used in the production of meat-based products in order to stabilise the colour (so-called reddening) and to preserve the product, are to be classified as food additives within the meaning of the Regulation on Food Additives (EC) No 1333/2008.

Judgment of 16 November 2015 - BVerwG 1 C 4.15 (uploaded on 18 April 2016)

Secondary application for asylum lodged by an unaccompanied minor


1. The provisions on responsibility for unaccompanied minors in article 6 of the Dublin II Regulation are protective of the individual, as they not only govern relationships between the Member States, but (also) serve to protect fundamental rights.

2. An unlawful rejection of an asylum application as inadmissible because responsibility lies with another country under section 27a of the Asylum Act cannot be reinterpreted as a (negative) decision on a secondary application under section 71a of the Asylum Act, because of the more adverse legal consequences.

Abschiebungsanordnung im Dublin-Verfahren


1. The Dublin Regulations do not prescribe any priority for the three transfer procedures they provide (cf. Art. 7(1) Regulation (EC) No. 1560/2003). In particular, there is no priority favouring a transfer on the asylum applicant’s own initiative.

2. The provision under sec. 34a(1) of the Asylum Procedure Act, according to which the Federal Office can order deportation as the only option for transferring a foreigner to the Member State responsible for reviewing his asylum application, is compatible with Union law. The foreigners authority tasked with enforcing the deportation must take due account of the principle of proportionality.

3. The principle of proportionality is maintained in that while transfer regularly takes the form of a deportation, in exceptional cases a transfer without administrative compulsion is possible. The executing authority must allow the asylum applicant the option of a transfer without administrative compulsion if it appears certain that he will voluntarily travel to the Member State responsible for reviewing his application and will report in a timely manner to the responsible authority there.

4.A transfer without administrative compulsion is not a deportation, and therefore does not result in a statutory ban on entry and residence under sec. 11 of the Residence Act.

No results found.

FAQhäufig gestellte Fragen

  • What judgments or decisions of the Federal Administrative Court can I find on the website?

    You can find rulings of the Federal Administrative Court from January 2002 onwards on this website. Excluded are

    • Decisions regarding values of the matter in dispute
    • Determinations of costs
    • Third-party summons
    • Settlement deals
    • Rulings that are classified or that have been rendered incomprehensible or distorted by the anonymisation required by law.

    Rulings of the Federal Administrative Court passed before the year 2002 will gradually be added to the website.

    You will also find abbreviated versions of several rulings in English.

  • When is the decision text for a judgment made available?

    It is usually published several weeks, in some cases also several months, after the delivery of a judgment.

    The background of this is as follows: In general, the Federal Administrative Court passes a judgment after a hearing and a deliberation. At that point in time, there is a ruling, the operative part of the judgment (so-called Tenor), but the text of the reasons for the ruling is not available yet. The written reasons will only be drawn up, a vote on them will be taken by the Senate, and they will be signed after the passing. Then the judgment will be delivered to all parties involved in the proceedings, anonymised and published.

  • What is the ECLI and what is it used for?

    ECLI is the abbreviation for the European Case Law Identifier. It serves to identify court rulings and enables cross-border search in a European judgment database. The ECLI allows for the linking of several sources and versions such as summaries, translations and comments for a judgment or decision. The ECLI often does not only lead you to just a single judgment, but to many other documents regarding this judgment.

  • How can I do research all over Europe using the ECLI?

    You can use the ECLI to do research in all participating national and European databases. That includes: