Commitment authorization

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Commitment authority (abbr. VE), in Switzerland also guarantee credit called ( english commitment Appropriations (CA), French crédits d'engagement (CE)) is a legal concept from the budget law ( § 38 BHO ) that in the budget outspoken authorization includes, Make commitments to make expenses in future years.


With a commitment authority which authorizes Parliament the executive branch , such as the government , the European Commission and other law enforcement agencies, financial obligations within the framework of a budget with a financial year to take out such. B. in public construction or armaments projects.

Budget law

Commitment authorizations deviate from the principle of the temporal specialty of the Budgetary Principles Act ( § 27 HGrG) and represent an exception, which was newly regulated in the Federal Republic of Germany with the budget reform legislation in 1969 in § 5 HGrG and § 6 BHO for cameralistics . They represent a quantified previous burden of special budget items in the coming years. They result from the need to meet multi-annual expenses for a title. The separate disclosure in the budget expenditure estimates makes it easier to control the extent of the advance debits in future budget years. Commitment appropriations may have little cash impact for the current year, but they can limit a budget's long-term leeway. This of course also limits the political leeway of the future parliament that will approve the budget.

In contrast, the payment authorization (ZE) ( English payment appropriation (PA), French credit de paiement (CP)) describes the payments actually to be made.

civil right

In civil law we speak of a budget commitment when someone authorized a third party in its own name with effect for the authorizing obligation transactions complete. The possibility of such an authorization is largely denied, however.

For civil law, the power of disposition is regulated in Section 185 (1) BGB . The owner may as a matter Third authorize, but one in its own name with effect for the owner the cause transfer ownership . The fact that the third party acts in his own name, not in someone else's name, is what distinguishes the authorization of disposal from the representation .

In analogy to this legally regulated authorization, some now also want to accept an authorization. However, the prevailing opinion rejects this , because otherwise the right of representation would be circumvented, which precisely demands the disclosure of representation (principle of disclosure ).

An exception to this is to be made in Section 1357 of the German Civil Code (so-called key power ) if the acting spouse carried out a “business to adequately cover the necessities of life” in his own name. Although both the power of representation and the lack of publicity are absent, Section 1357 (1) sentence 2 BGB acts as an exceptionally permissible statutory authorization.

Individual evidence

  1. SR 611.01 Financial Budget Ordinance of the Swiss Confederation. Retrieved on April 10, 2011 (see Chapter 2, Section 2, Art. 10).