Menu Expand

Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE

Style

Oebbecke, J (2021). Kollegialentscheidungen unter Zeitdruck. Die Verwaltung, 54(2), 273-294. https://doi.org/10.3790/verw.54.2.273
Oebbecke, Janbernd (2021). "Kollegialentscheidungen unter Zeitdruck" Die Verwaltung, vol. 54no. 2, 2021 pp. 273-294. https://doi.org/10.3790/verw.54.2.273
Oebbecke, J (2021). Kollegialentscheidungen unter Zeitdruck. Die Verwaltung, Vol. 54 (Issue 2), pp 273-294. https://doi.org/10.3790/verw.54.2.273

Format

Kollegialentscheidungen unter Zeitdruck

Empirie, Theorie und Dogmatik der Dringlichkeitsentscheidungen im Kommunalrecht

Oebbecke, Janbernd

Die Verwaltung, Vol. 54 (2021), Iss. 2 : pp. 273–294

Additional Information

Article Details

Pricing

Author Details

Prof. em. Dr. Janbernd Oebbecke, Rechtswissenschaftliche Fakultät, Kommunalwissenschaftliches Institut, Universitätsstraße 14–16, 48141 Münster

Abstract

Collegial bodies can react to time pressure either by speeding up their procedure or by transferring urgent decisions to a special organ which can decide very quickly. In Germany, the representative bodies of local government have both options. This article examines decisions of urgency taken by a special organ of local government.

This article analyses the circumstances in which such decisions are taken based on the relevant literature as well as on self-collected data from cities in North Rhine Westphalia. The results can be put into five categories. Although the relevant Länder laws vary at the level of detail, they are united by a common structure. They determine that a decision is urgent only when the representative body – even applying an accelerated procedure – cannot decide in time. They set out which organ is legally competent to decide and require that the representative body of local government either approves the decision in retrospect or is, at least, informed of it. According to these regulations the decision of urgency is always concomitant with a decision on the legal competency of the special organ and on the administrative matter at hand. Their application raises numerous legal questions.

In the majority of cases, decisions of urgency are taken in violation of the legal requirement, even though the representative body could have taken the decision by applying an accelerated procedure. From the perspective of those involved calling a special meeting takes too much time and effort to decide on an issue which is, in most cases, completely uncontested. Currently, a correction of this unlawful practice by legal means virtually impossible. It is, therefore, suggested that each member of the representative body should be given standing to bring a claim for judicial review. In terms of legal policy, urgent decisions should to be allowed also when the representative body cannot decide in time at the next regular meeting.

Table of Contents

Section Title Page Action Price
Janbernd Oebbecke: Kollegialentscheidungen unter Zeitdruck 273
Empirie, Theorie und Dogmatik der Dringlichkeitsentscheidungen im Kommunalrecht 273
I. Kollegialentscheidungen und der Umgang mit Zeitdruck 273
II. Dringlichkeitsentscheidungen in der Praxis 274
1. Der Spiegel des Schrifttums 274
2. Eigene Erhebung 275
3. Einflussfaktoren 277
III. Rechtsvergleich und Theorie der Dringlichkeitsentscheidung 278
1. Dringlichkeitsstufe 279
2. Dringlichkeitstatbestand 279
3. Das Dringlichkeitsorgan 280
4. Das Folgeverfahren 281
5. Der Doppelcharakter der Dringlichkeitsentscheidung 281
IV. Praxis und Rechtsfragen 273
1. Zulässige Gegenstände von Dringlichkeitsentscheidungen 273
2. Der Tatbestand der Dringlichkeit 273
3. Das Dringlichkeitsorgan 273
4. Das Folgeverfahren 273
V. Die Durchsetzung der gesetzlichen Vorgaben 273
1. Rechtsschutz gegen die Sachentscheidung 273
2. Die Durchsetzung der Regeln für die Zuständigkeitsentscheidung 273
VI. Rechtspolitische Optionen 273
Abstract 274