BGH denies leave to appeal in civil commercial dispute, omitting reasoning under § 544(6) ZPO
Deutschland (DE)
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Federal Court of Justice rejected the plaintiff's complaint against the non-admission of revision, thereby upholding the lower court's judgment and leaving the decision of the 21st Civil Senate of the Kammergericht in force. The dispute, with a subject matter value of approximately €390,000, arose from a civil matter reviewed on appeal, where the plaintiff sought to challenge the appellate court's refusal to admit a further instance of jurisdiction. The court declined to provide a reasoned decision, citing § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, which permits omitting the grounds when such a decision would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for admitting revision. Consequently, the plaintiff was ordered to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings, except for costs caused by ancillary interventions on the plaintiff's side, which the intervenors must bear themselves pursuant to §§ 97 Abs. 1 and 101 Abs. 1 ZPO.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 101 Abs. 1 ZPO, § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO; BGH denies leave to appeal in civil commercial dispute, omitting reasoning under § 544(6) ZPO: The dispute, with a subject matter value of approximately €390,000, arose from a civil matter reviewed on appeal, where the plaintiff sought to challenge the appellate court's refusal to admit a further instance of jurisdiction. The court declined to provide a reasoned decision, citing § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, which permits omitting the grounds when such a decision would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for admitting revision. Consequently, the plaintiff was ordered to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings, except for costs caused by ancillary interventions on the plaintiff's side, which the intervenors must bear themselves pursuant to §§ 97 Abs. 1 and 101 Abs. 1 ZPO.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertBasis for omitting the detailed reasoning for the rejection of the complaint against the non-admission of revision.
Provision governing the allocation of costs of the legal remedy to the losing party.
Provision governing the allocation of costs incurred by ancillary intervenors.
Volltext
Die Beschwerde der Klägerin gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Urteil des 21. Zivilsenats des Kammergerichts vom 3. März 2023 wird zurückgewiesen.
Von einer Begründung wird abgesehen, weil sie nicht geeignet wäre, zur Klärung der Voraussetzungen beizutragen, unter denen eine Revision zuzulassen ist (§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO).
Die Klägerin trägt die Kosten des Beschwerdeverfahrens mit Ausnahme der durch die Nebeninterventionen auf Seiten der Klägerin verursachten Kosten; diese tragen die Streithelfer selbst (§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO, § 101 Abs. 1 ZPO).
Gegenstandswert: 390.349,89 €
Pamp Halfmeier Jurgeleit
Graßnack Brenneisen