Preliminary proceedings

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A preliminary procedure is

  1. a procedure in which an authority re- examines a decision it has made before judicial proceedings take place,
  2. a possibility for the citizen to defend himself against an administrative act , also known colloquially as a decision (objection to appeal) or against the rejection of an administrative act (objection to an obligation), and
  3. The prerequisite for the admissibility of a subsequent action for rescission or obligation .

In the area of ​​general administration and social administration , the preliminary procedure is called an objection procedure . In tax matters and patent law, the preliminary proceedings are called opposition proceedings . The preliminary procedure in the enforcement procedure is called the complaint procedure .

The preliminary proceedings are to be distinguished from counter-presentations , technical supervisory complaints and official supervisory complaints .

Purpose and meaning of the preliminary proceedings

The preliminary proceedings have a dual legal nature. On the one hand, it is a preliminary procedure regulated in the Administrative Court Code (VwGO) or in the Social Court Act (SGG), which is necessary for the admissibility of an action for contestation or obligation . On the other hand, it is also an administrative procedure . This is shown by the fact that the preliminary proceedings are not carried out by the court, but by the authority responsible for the original administrative act or application itself or the opposition authority assigned to it. Because of this dual nature, the question arises in administrative proceedings as to whether the Federal Republic of Germany with the administrative court rules is materially responsible for the legal structure or whether the preliminary proceedings are the subject of the federal administrative procedural laws (VwVfG) or the federal states . An assessment must be made, for example, when calculating the deadline for the objection or when the notice of exit is made worse by the notice of objection.

The preliminary proceedings also serve the citizen. He can, especially if he is subjectively affected, also tackle an inappropriate lawful administrative act through preliminary proceedings , while in the case of a judicial review he can only cite the illegality of the administrative act. It also aims to relieve the courts.

Effect of the pre-litigation

The most important legal effect of the pre-litigation procedure, also known as the objection procedure, is its suspensive effect . One month after the announcement or the legally accepted prerequisite that it has been announced ( surrogation ), an administrative act becomes formally final , unless the person concerned has lodged an objection and thus started the preliminary proceedings. The suspensive effect initiated by the objection usually prevents the execution of the administrative act by way of administrative enforcement . This does not apply for the recovery of public charges and costs for urgent action by law enforcement officials or the contradiction of a neighbor for a building permit . Despite the objection, the authority that issued the administrative act to be contested or the objection authority can order the reinstatement of the suspensive effect if the overriding interest of a party or the common good so requires. The citizen can apply for the establishment or restoration of the suspensive effect of the objection to the exit authority, the objection authority or the court of the main issue by means of temporary legal protection . The opposition procedure does not trigger a suspensive effect.

The filing of an objection or an objection is, according to § 68 VwGO, § 78 SGG , § 44 Paragraph 1 FGO, a prerequisite for a contestation and an obligation. If the authority does not react at all to the objection for a long time, an action for failure to act according to § 75 VwGO, § 88 SGG, § 46 para. 1 FGO comes into consideration. The tax authority can waive the opposition proceedings against the court.

A further effect of the opposition procedure consists in the condition precedent characterized devolutive that the disputed administrative be adopted or proposed such defiant authority does not remedy the conflict. The devolution effect is alien to the objection procedure.

The administrative and social law objection procedure


Whoever is the complainant is entitled to raise the objection ( Section 70 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1 VwGO, Section 84 SGG). A complainant is anyone who can assert that his / her own rights have been violated by an illegal or inexpedient administrative act or the illegal omission of such ( Section 42 (2), Section 68 (1) sentence 1, paragraph 2, Section 70 (1) P. 1 VwGO). It can be

  • the addressee of an administrative act
  • an outside third party whose rights are adversely affected by the effects of the administrative act (so-called third party objection).

For the admissibility of a subsequent action for rescission or obligation, it is not decisive whether the preliminary proceedings have been carried out properly, because the appellant has no influence on this. The decisive factor is whether the preliminary proceedings have been properly initiated by the person concerned.

Dispensability of contradiction

The implementation of an objection procedure is dispensable according to § 68 Abs. 1 Satz 2 Nr. 1 VwGO , § 78 Abs. 1 Satz 1 SGG against administrative acts of the highest federal or state authorities. According to Section 68, Paragraph 1, Clause 2, No. 2, an objection procedure does not take place against remedial action or objection notices that contain a complaint from a third party for the first time .

  • Example: Client B applies for a building permit . The request will be denied. In response to his objection, he will be granted approval by the objection authority (remedy). As a result, neighbor N (third party) sees himself burdened (first complaint). He must now immediately bring an action to challenge the building permit before the administrative court. Conversely, client B receives the coveted building permit. However, it is lifted by the opposition authority on the objection of the neighbor N. B is the third to complain for the first time. This time he has to file an action for the granting of the building permit immediately before the administrative court.

According to the case law of the Federal Administrative Court , preliminary proceedings can also be dispensed with in certain other cases. According to this, the preliminary proceedings can be dispensed with if it can be inferred from the behavior of the authority that an objection would be unsuccessful.

For the social administration procedure, the preliminary procedure does not take place if a country, a social insurance agency or one of its associations want to take legal action ( Section 78, Paragraph 1, Clause 2, No. 3 SGG).

Section 68 (1) sentence 2 VwGO empowers the states to waive the objection procedure in the area of ​​state administration and legal entities under public law that are subject to the supervision of the states within the framework of competing legislation . Various federal states have made use of this option. This gives the citizen the opportunity in certain proceedings either to take legal action against an administrative act immediately or to choose between preliminary proceedings and direct action. As usual, the court is not limited to reviewing legality. The cost risk associated with a lawsuit is higher than in the case of an objection procedure.

Formal requirements: deadline, form, place of filing the objection

The objection must be submitted in due form and in due time. Statements on the form and deadline are contained in Section 70 (1) VwGO and Section 84 SGG.


Length of time limit

In principle, the objection must be submitted within one month to the authority that issued the administrative act to be contested, or its competent objection authority ( Section 70 (1) VwGO, Section 84 (1) SGG). In social law, if the administrative act is announced abroad, the deadline for filing an objection is three months (Section 84 (1) sentence 2 SGG). The respective deadline only applies if the exit notification is provided with complete and error-free instructions on legal remedies . If the information on legal remedies is missing completely or if its content is incorrect, the period is extended to 1 year ( Section 58 (2) VwGO, Section 66 (2) SGG).

Start of period

The period begins with the announcement of the administrative act. The announcement takes place in accordance with § 41 VwVfG by formal delivery , public announcement , verbal announcement or throwing in the mailbox of the recipient. The latter is the rule in mass administration proceedings, although in practice it is not uncommon for evidence difficulties to arise which, in case of doubt, have an adverse effect on the authority.

Particular attention should be paid to the rules for notification when delivery is made by means of a postal delivery document, when the letter is handed over by an official of the authority or when the letter is received later than the 3-day fiction. The special regulations of § 4 VwZG (Administrative Delivery Act) apply here.

Calculation of the deadline

What is in dispute is the rules according to which the period is calculated. Due to the legal dual nature of the preliminary proceedings, there is both a time limit calculation according to the provisions of the VwVfG ( § 79 , § 31 VwVfG) and a calculation according to the provisions of the VwGO ( § 57 Paragraph 2 VwGO, § 222 Paragraph 2 Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO)) into consideration. The prevailing opinion is based on the calculation according to §§ 79, 31 VwVfG, because the regulation on the objection period (§ 70 para. 2 VwGO) does not refer to § 57 VwGO. As a result, both opinions lead to the same result, as both § 31 VwVfG and § 222 Paragraph 2 ZPO refer to §§ 187 ff. BGB . According to Section 187 (1) BGB, the objection period is an event period .

Special features for third party contradictions

The above deadline does not apply to the complainant who has not been notified of the original decision by the authority. In this case, the objection is admissible as long as it has not lost its right to object through forfeiture . The right of objection is forfeited as soon as at least one month has passed since the third party has certain knowledge of the official decision addressed to another (the recipient) or can consider it possible and the third party during this time through his behavior both with the addressee and also gave the authority the impression that he agreed with the decision of the authorities.

Healing of a failure to meet deadlines by entering into the matter

It is controversial whether an objection lodged too late is cured if the authority makes a factual decision. This largely depends on what the purpose of the opposition proceedings is. In one opinion, the main purpose is to relieve the courts. Since the VwGO contains mandatory procedural law, the authority cannot override it unilaterally. The case law, on the other hand, sees the preliminary proceedings primarily as a possibility for the administration to self-regulate: it should again be able to review the legality and appropriateness of a decision. This should also relieve the judiciary. The time limit regulation thus serves solely to protect the administration; if she waives this protection, the failure to observe the objection period can be regarded as cured.


The objection is to be raised in writing or to be recorded (§ 70 Abs. 1 VwGO, § 84 Abs. 1 SGG). A telephonic Widerspruchseinlegung does not meet the formal requirements.


The writing is done contest the claim by drafting a document on the part of the appellant or his authorized representative . According to Section 126 (1) BGB, a handwritten signature by the opponent or his authorized representative is required. In the opinion of the Federal Administrative Court, however, the requirement of a signature can be waived if it is sufficiently certain from the letter of objection and any attachments that the document originates from the opponent and was deliberately put into circulation by him.

An objection by fax , telex (telex) or telebrief is sufficient in writing, but not by simple e-mail - i.e. without a qualified electronic signature. It can be different for an e-mail with a qualified electronic signature ; The prerequisite for this, however, is that the recipient - i. H. the authority to which the objection is to be addressed - has given access for this purpose ( Section 3a (1) VwVfG). This question is still handled differently in the individual federal states; if necessary, prior clarification is required. In the taxation procedure, an objection by simple e-mail has been legally permitted since August 1, 2013, in accordance with Section 357, Paragraph 1, Clause 1 of the Tax Code (AO).

If the handwritten signature is missing and it is required after what has just been said, it can in principle be made up for, but only within the objection period. The authority is required to provide appropriate information. If they fail to do so, a reinstatement in the previous status may be considered.


Filing for the record means that the opponent formulates his objection orally in the authority, whereupon an employee authorized to receive it records this declaration in writing. The opponent must always sign this document. The possibility of writing down was created primarily with regard to opponents who do not know the language or writing, so as not to deny them legal protection. However, the writing is not limited to this group of people. In principle, anyone who complains can make use of the possibility of writing it down.

Content of the letter of objection

In terms of content, there are only minor requirements for a letter of objection. The objection does not have to be substantiated, nor is it necessary to expressly designate the letter as a "contradiction". Incorrect terms such as “objection” or “complaint” are not harmful; there may even be no formal designation for the letter. It is sufficient that the authority can see

  • against which authority decision the letter is directed and
  • that the addressee does not agree with the decision and requests a review.

Insofar as the content of the objection is substantiated by the opponent, this provides information for the authority as to which aspect the addressee is complaining about. However, the authority may not limit the review to the aspects complained of and ignore other issues that have not been complained of. Rather, the authority must review the entire administrative act in all its components for legality and expediency, regardless of the specific submission of the opponent. The objection is therefore also successful if the opponent wrongly criticized one aspect, but another aspect that was not criticized nevertheless turns out to be faulty.

Place of filing the objection

The objection must be raised by the addressee or the third party at the authority that issued the administrative act to be contested (Section 70 (1) sentence 1 VwGO, Section 84 (1) sentence 1 SGG). It is also permissible to lodge an objection with the objection authority (Section 70 (1) sentence 2 VwGO); this is the authority that has to issue the notice of objection (Section 73 (1) sentences 2 and 3 VwGO). If the objection is lodged with the objection authority, the latter will forward the objection to the exit authority. In social law, it is also sufficient to meet the deadline to lodge the objection with another domestic authority, an insurance carrier , a German consular authority or, in cases in which the insurance of seafarers is the subject of the proceedings, with a German seaman's office (Section 84 (2) Sentence 1 SGG).

Course of the objection procedure

The preliminary proceedings begin with the raising of the objection , § 69 VwGO, § 83 SGG, or the objection.

Remedial review by the exit authority

The originally competent authority then carries out a remedial test. In this respect, it performs the function of the remedial authority. This check takes place regardless of whether the objection was lodged with the exit authority or with the objection authority. In the latter case, the objection authority forwards the objection to the exit authority for comment. As part of the remedial check, the exit authority examines, taking into account the submissions from the letter of objection, whether it adheres to the challenged decision or whether it considers the objection to be successful and wants to revoke the challenged decision or issue the coveted administrative act.

  • If the exit authority considers the objection to be justified (i.e. the originally issued decision to be illegal or inexpedient), it will help it by (in the event of a dispute) lifting the challenged administrative act or (in the event of an obligation) issuing the coveted administrative act. In this case, the objection procedure is concluded in favor of the opponent without the involvement of the objection authority.
  • If the originally competent authority does not remedy the objection, it submits the objection to the objection authority for a decision (suspensory devolution effect).

Decision by the objection authority

As a rule, the objection authority decides by means of an objection notice. If the objection authority either does not allow the objection or only partially accepts it, it will notify the person making the objection in this respect. In accordance with administrative procedural law, the appellant must in principle bear the costs of the opposition proceedings. Against the original administrative act, in the form that it found through the notice of objection, action for rescission or obligation can now be brought, whereby a deadline must also be observed from the notification of the notice of objection.

The objection authority is usually the authority above the remedial authority, unless the next higher authority is a supreme federal or state authority. Then the objection authority is the highest authority that issued the initial decision. The objection authority is identical to the exit authority in self-administration matters of the municipalities and districts, unless the state legislature determines otherwise (e.g. in the case of contradictions in matters of the transferred sphere of activity or with regard to the legality check). In some federal states, collegial committees or advisory boards take the place of the objection authorities.

Content of the appeal decision

The objection authority checks the attacked administrative act in full for its legality and appropriateness. It must not limit its review to the points of view that the opponent has put forward in his grounds for opposition, but must investigate ex officio all conceivable reasons for illegality. It can remedy the objection or reject the objection. The problem is whether the objection authority can also make a decision that goes beyond the challenged decision, which additionally burdens the addressee.


With the objection, the objection authority makes a new factual decision that gives the challenged decision a new shape. In the case of defense, this “in the form of the notice of objection” is the subject of the contestation action ( Section 79 (1) VwGO). If necessary, the objection authority can conduct its own investigations of the facts as part of its review. You have to take into account new knowledge that z. B. can result from the objection letter, unless the opponent had violated his obligations to cooperate , particularly in the social administrative procedure, before the contested administrative act was issued or after the application for such an act was submitted.


The question of whether the opposition authority will proceed lawfully when it issues the appellant with an objection notice that contains an additional independent complaint compared to the original administrative act is the subject of numerous disputes. The case law allows a deviation of the notice of objection from the initial notice to the detriment of the person making the objection ( reformatio in peius ).

In opposition proceedings, it is undisputed that the law allows for an increase in resolution ( Section 367 (2) sentence 2 AO ). The tax authority must, however, inform the appellant beforehand about this possibility and hear about the matter. He can then withdraw his objection if necessary.

Section 367 (2) sentence 2 AO, on the other hand, does not apply to the social administration process. In this case, the objection authority can only remedy this to the extent that the originally competent authoritycouldsubsequently revoke its decision, taking into account the protection of legitimate expectations.

Form of the notice of objection

There are no legal formal requirements for the notice of objection, but in practice a structure similar to the judgment has developed. According to Section 73 (3) sentence 1 VwGO, the administrative objection notice must be sent . According to Section 85 (3) sentence 1 SGG, notification is sufficient in social law .


Civil service contradictions

Pursuant to Section 126 (2) BBG ( Federal Civil Service Act ) or, for state and municipal civil servants, pursuant to Section 54 (2) BeamtStG ( Civil Service Status Act ), a civil servant must conduct preliminary proceedings before any civil service complaint, even if this is not provided for in the VwGO. Section 126 (3) (framework law for the standardization of civil service law - civil service law framework law ) is still in force, but has become largely meaningless due to the above new regulations.

Procedures in social administration

It should be noted that special legal regulations apply in the area of social law. The rules of the preliminary proceedings result from the Social Court Act (SGG), while the regulations on general administrative procedures can be found in Book 10 of the Social Code - Social Administration Procedures and Social Data Protection - (SGB X) . Although the provisions are the same or at least similar in many areas, there may be significant deviations in individual cases.


For the state of Hesse, the following applies: Before a decision on objections to certain administrative acts is made, the objector must be heard by a committee . The details can be found in § 7 HessAGVwGO. In the cases mentioned in the annex to § 16a HessAGVwGO, the preliminary procedure does not apply. If the preliminary proceedings are not omitted, the authority that issued or rejected the administrative act also decides on the objection, if the next higher authority is the regional council or the Hessen Economic and Infrastructure Bank . (Section 16a (4) HessAGVwGO).

Lower Saxony

In Lower Saxony , contrary to Section 68 Paragraph 1 Clause 1 VwGO, there is no need for a review in a preliminary procedure, Section 80 Paragraph 1, 2 Nds. JustG. There are exceptions to this, e.g. B. in building law.


In Bavaria in the administrative district of Middle Franconia ( VG Ansbach ), an objection procedure as a field test was not carried out at all from July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2006. Even before the end of the trial, the Bavarian State Parliament decided on June 21, 2007 , to abolish most of the preliminary proceedings in Bavaria from July 1, 2007. Sun remains for those affected only an option in areas of local tax law , the agricultural law , the school law , of social justice , the country's officials the right as well as review decisions in accordance with Art. 15 Art15 para. 2 BayAGVwGO as to whether they intend to file a contradiction at first or immediately appealed to the Raise administrative court against the decision. For all other procedures the preliminary procedure according to Art. 15 Art. 15 Abs. 2 BayAGVwGO does not apply . It should be noted here that this omission only relates to proceedings by the authorities of the Free State of Bavaria, the municipalities and associations of municipalities and other legal entities under public law under the supervision of the Free State of Bavaria.

The objection authority within the meaning of § 73 VwGO is according to Art. 119 of the Bavarian Municipal Code

  1. in matters within one's own sphere of activity, the legal supervisory authority , which is limited to checking legality; beforehand, the self-governing authority has to check the expediency according to § 72 VwGO,
  2. the technical supervisory authority in matters of the transferred sphere of activity; if the technical supervisory authority is a supreme state authority, the authority that issued the administrative act decides.

A decision on the objection of municipalities belonging to a district to a supervisory administrative act is made according to Art. 120 BayGO

  1. the government in matters of legal supervision,
  2. in matters of technical supervision the higher technical supervisory authority; If the higher technical supervisory authority is a supreme state authority, the decision is made by the authority that issued the supervisory administrative act.

North Rhine-Westphalia

In North Rhine-Westphalia , the preliminary procedure pursuant to Section 68 (1) sentence 1 VwGO was fundamentally abolished by the Second Bureaucratic Reduction Act, cf. Section 110 (1) JustG NW (Justice Act North Rhine-Westphalia). Exceptions exist for the cases mentioned in § 110 para. 2 JustG NW as well as in accordance with Section 110 (3) JustG NW in the event of third-party contradictions. Other state laws can also provide for exceptions, Section 110 (4) JustG NW. For example, Section 103 (2) LBG NW (State Civil Service Act of North Rhine-Westphalia) provides for an objection procedure for legal action by professional civil servants against certain measures.

A new version of Section 110 JustG is currently being prepared, according to which the objection procedure will be reintroduced in various areas from January 1, 2015. According to the state government, it has been shown that the legal protection of citizens in these areas cannot be adequately guaranteed without an objection procedure. In particular, the cost risk associated with the administrative court lawsuit would discourage people from contesting decisions they felt were unjustified. The partial reintroduction is largely rejected by the municipalities and districts due to the associated costs.


Rhineland-Palatinate has made use of the restrictions stipulated in Section 73 (1) Sentence 2 No. 1 and 3 VwGO, according to which a law can declare another objection authority to be responsible for issuing the objection notice (“... unless otherwise stipulated by law is "). According to § 6 Abs. 1 Nr. 1 AGVwGO (state law for the execution of the administrative court order), the district law committees are the competent objection authority if the objection is against an administrative act of

  • District administration,
  • an authority subordinate to the district administration,
  • an association administration,
  • the municipal administration of a municipality belonging to a district or
  • the authority of another corporation, establishment or foundation under public law that is subject to the supervision of the district administration


According to § 6 Abs. 1 Nr. 2 AGVwGO, the municipal law committee is the competent objection authority if the objection to an administrative act is the

  • City administration of an independent or large city or
  • the authority of a corporation, establishment or foundation under public law that is subject to their supervision.

District and municipal law committees are in accordance with Section 7 (1) sentence 2 half 2 AGVwGO bodies of these regional authorities that are independent of instructions . This has two consequences:

  • A reformatio in peius cannot lawfully be carried out by the district or municipal law committee. Such an evasion in opposition proceedings can only be permissible if the opposition authority is either identical to the exit authority or has technical supervision over the exit authority. However, since the committees are independent bodies that are independent of instructions, they do not have the same person as the exit authority and they also have no specialist supervisory rights. A reformatio in peius by the legal committees is therefore formally illegal due to a violation of the authority's competence.
  • In certain cases, is testing competence of the legal committee to a mere review of legality of the administrative act limited . This arises from Section 6 (2) AGVwGO, which states that administrative acts that have been issued by an association municipality, the municipal administration of a municipality belonging to a district or the authority of another corporation, institution or foundation under public law in self-administration matters , can only be checked by the Legal Affairs Committee for their legality. The same applies to administrative acts that have been issued by the authority of a corporation, institution or foundation under public law that is subject to the supervision of the city administration in accordance with Section 6 (1) No. 2 AGVwGO. The Legal Committee cannot therefore check the legality and appropriateness of the administrative act, as is customary in objection proceedings due to Section 68 (1) VwGO , but can only check the compliance of the administrative act with the legal requirements based on a pure legality check. This reduced examination density in turn has two consequences:
    • A right of objection analogous to Section 42 (2) VwGO cannot also be derived from the inappropriate nature of the administrative act and the associated impairment of interests; in the cases of Section 6 (2) AGVwGO, the appellant must assert a violation of the law, as is also required for actions for avoidance or obligation.
    • Due to the reduced examination competence, the opposition authority cannot make its own discretionary considerations, but only checks the discretionary considerations made by the exit authority for errors of judgment, i.e. for failure, excess and misuse.

Section 6 (1) AGVwGO contains a restriction according to which, by law, an objection authority other than that provided for in this section may be responsible. An example case is § 126 half. 2 of the Rhineland-Palatinate municipal code. For measures taken by the district administration as a local supervisory authority in accordance with Section 118 (1) Clause 1 GemO, the District Legal Committee would in principle have to issue the objection notice in accordance with Section 73 (1) Clause 2 No. 1 VwGO in conjunction with Section 6 (1) No. 1a AGVwGO. But since § 126 half. 2 GemO to § 6 Abs. 1 AGVwGO is a statutory exception, in the case of local supervision by the district administration, the supervisory and service directorate issues the objection notice.

Further cases of preliminary proceedings

However, preliminary proceedings are also common in other areas of law. These are in particular the following cases:

Objection procedure according to the tax code

The taxpayer can appeal against a tax assessment .

Objection to patent grant

Prior complaint in enforcement proceedings

Another case of a preliminary procedure is initiated with the filing of the so-called. Vorschaltbeschwerde by the injured in Klageerzwingungsverfahren .

See also

Litigation Laws

Substantive Law Laws

Literature (selection)

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. Bettina Plöger-Heeg, Marita Hasebrink: General Administrative Law . Kommunal- und Schul-Verlag, Wiesbaden 2015, pp. 119–120 ISBN 978-3-8293-1181-6
  2. BVerwG 8 C 21.09, judgment of September 15, 2010 | Federal Administrative Court. Retrieved March 15, 2020 .
  3. ^ Kopp / Schenke, Commentary on the Administrative Court Regulations , 24th edition 2018, Rn. 16 ff. And 22 ff. On § 68 VwGO
  4. BVerfG, decision of May 9, 1973 - 2 BvL 43, 44/71 para. 37 ff.
  5. cf. for Baden-Wuerttemberg: Section 15 of the Act to Implement the Administrative Court Regulations (AGVwGO) of October 14, 2008 (Journal of Laws of 2008, 343, 356); for Berlin: Section 4 (2) of the Act for the Implementation of the Administrative Court Regulations (AGVwGO) in the version of February 22, 1977 (GVBl. 1977, 557)
  6. cf. for Bavaria: Art. 15 Law for the Implementation of the Administrative Court Regulations (AGVwGO) in the version published on June 20, 1992 (GVBl. p. 162)
  7. ^ Dolde / Porsch in Schoch / Schmidt-Aßmann / Pietzner, VwGO, 20th edition 2010, § 70 Rn. 40, mw N.
  8. inter alia BVerwGE 57, 342 (344) = NJW 1980, 135.
  9. Judgment of May 2nd, 2011, Az. 25 K 7436/09. Administrative Court Cologne, May 2, 2011, accessed on August 6, 2015 : “ A simple e-mail without a qualified electronic signature does not meet the requirement of being in writing. " ; The Bundesfinanzhof is different, however, for objections in the taxation procedure even before the application of Section 357, Paragraph 1, Clause 1 of the Tax Code, judgment of May 13, 2015, Az. III R 26/14. In the opinion of the court, a qualified electronic signature is not required
  10. See also amendment to the law of BayAGVwGO (Drs. 15/8406) (PDF; 139 kB) and press release State Ministry of the Interior  ( page no longer available , search in web archivesInfo: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link /  
  11. ^ Schmidt, Kathrin / Nauheim-Skrobek, Ulrike: The abolition of the objection procedure. In: Deutsche Verwaltungspraxis (DVP) 2014, 3 (6). Retrieved December 12, 2019 .
  12. Printed matter of the state parliament NRW 16/1925; 16/1914; 16/1989; LT printed matter 16/6089; Plenary minutes of the State Parliament of North Rhine-Westphalia 16/63 on the first reading of the state government's draft law on the law amending the State Civil Service Act and the Justice Act North Rhine-Westphalia and the adaptation of further legal provisions, Annex 2
  13. ^ OVG Koblenz, NVwZ-RR 2004, 723.