Facts
The appellant [X.] operates an automatic bird protection system in the Rebgut Hörnli in Endingen. The respondent [Y.] filed an application with the municipal council of Endingen on 2 September 2005 to conduct an ordinary building permit procedure for the system. The municipal council denied the building permit requirement on 17 October 2005. An administrative appeal filed by [Y.] was upheld by the Department of Construction, Transport and Environment (BVU) on 2 May 2006, and the matter was remanded to the municipal council. [X.] filed an administrative court appeal against this decision, which was dismissed by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau on 16 March 2007.
[X.] then filed a complaint in public law matters (Art. 82 ff. FSCA) and requested that the complaint be granted suspensive effect. The President of the I. Public Law Division of the Federal Court dismissed the application for a suspensive effect on 29 June 2007.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the admissibility requirements and found that the Federal Court Act applies, as the contested decision was issued after 1 January 2007. The Administrative Court had affirmed the building permit requirement for the bird protection system and remanded the case to the municipal council to conduct an ordinary building permit procedure.
The Federal Court found that the requirements of Art. 93 para. 1 lit. b FSCA are met, as upholding the complaint would immediately lead to a final decision and thus save significant time or costs for an extensive evidence-taking procedure. The appellant was entitled to file the complaint, and the complaint was filed in a timely manner.
The Federal Court rejected the appellant's objection that the Administrative Court had violated the right to be heard by waiving an on-site inspection. It found that the…