The AI workspace for legal professionals

  • Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
  • Document automation
  • Matter management
  • Hosted in the EU and Switzerland

Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)

Try for freeBook a demo

Revision admitted on broadcasting fee second-device exemption

BVerwG 6 B 36/10, 6 B 36/10 (6 C 45/10)Bverwg / Division 6Dec 1, 2010Granted

Open source

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The Federal Administrative Court granted the complaint against denial of leave to appeal. It held that the case raises a question of fundamental significance concerning whether a new-type reception device located in a non-private area, but on the same premises as privately kept reception devices, qualifies as a second device exempt from broadcasting fees under § 5(3) RGebStV. The court also set the dispute value according to the cited GKG provisions.

Omnilex headnote

§ 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO; revision admissibility for fundamental significance in broadcasting-fee disputes concerning second devices: The question whether a new-type reception device situated outside the purely private sphere, but assigned to the same property on which the fee payer keeps private reception devices ready for reception, is exempt as a second device under § 5(3) RGebStV, is a matter of fundamental significance if it is not yet sufficiently clarified in the Federal Administrative Court's case law. The purpose of leave to appeal is to enable clarification of an unresolved, general legal question whose answer is capable of affecting a plurality of comparable cases (consid. 1).

Full text

BVerwG — 6 B 36/10, 6 B 36/10 (6 C 45/10), Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2010-12-01

Aktenzeichen: 6 B 36/10, 6 B 36/10 (6 C 45/10)

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Normen: § 5 Abs 3 RdFunkGebVtr

Vorinstanz: vorgehend Hessischer Verwaltungsgerichtshof, 30. März 2010, Az: 10 A 2910/09, Beschluss

Spruchkörper: 6. Senat

Titelzeile

Rundfunkgebühr; im häuslichen Arbeitszimmer beruflich genutzter internetfähiger Computer

Gründe

1 Die Revision ist gem. § 132 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO wegen grundsätzlicher Bedeutung des Rechtsstreits zuzulassen. Das angestrebte Revisionsverfahren kann zur Beantwortung der bisher in der Rechtsprechung des Bundesverwaltungsgerichts nicht ausreichend geklärten Frage beitragen, ob neuartige Rundfunkempfangsgeräte, die sich im nicht ausschließlich privaten Bereich befinden, aber einem Grundstück zugeordnet sind, auf dem der Gebührenpflichtige im privaten Bereich andere Rundfunkempfangsgeräte zum Empfang bereit hält, gem. § 5 Abs. 3 RGebStV als Zweitgeräte von der Rundfunkgebühr befreit sind.

2 Die Streitwertfestsetzung für das Beschwerdeverfahren folgt aus § 47 Abs. 1 Satz 2 und Abs. 3 i.V.m. § 52 Abs. 3 GKG; die vorläufige Streitwertfestsetzung beruht auf § 47 Abs. 1 und 3, § 52 Abs. 3 GKG i.V.m. § 63 Abs. 1 Satz 1 GKG.

Keywords

broadcasting feesecond devicefundamental significancerevision leavehome officeinternet-capable computer

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether revision should be admitted for the question whether a new-type reception device located outside the purely private sphere but assigned to the same premises as private reception devices is exempt as a second device under § 5(3) RGebStV.

Extracted holding

Revision was admitted because the question has fundamental significance and is not yet sufficiently clarified in the Federal Administrative Court's case law.

Extracted reasoning

The intended revision proceedings can contribute to clarifying the scope of the second-device exemption for new-type reception devices located in a non-exclusively private area on the same property as private reception devices kept ready for reception.

Key legal question

Assessment of the dispute value for the complaint proceedings.

Extracted holding

The dispute value was set under the GKG provisions cited by the court.

Extracted reasoning

The court relied on § 47(1) sentence 2 and (3) in conjunction with § 52(3) GKG, and provisionally on § 47(1) and (3), § 52(3) and § 63(1) sentence 1 GKG.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.