Non-admission of Revision complaint in civil dispute; omission of written reasoning
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Federal Court of Justice (BGH) 7th Civil Senate dismissed the plaintiff's complaint against the non-admission of the appeal on points of law (Revision) to the higher instance, leaving the judgment of the Saarland Superior Court of Appeals dated November 10, 2021, in force; the plaintiff prevailed no further and bore the costs of the complaint proceedings, including those incurred by a third-party intervention on the defendant's side, with the disputed value capped at €40,000. The case involved a civil dispute where the plaintiff sought to challenge the lower appellate court's decision, but the supreme court found no grounds to admit the appeal. The decision was issued without a written statement of reasons pursuant to § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, as such an explanation would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for admitting an appeal to the higher instance.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 101 Abs. 1 ZPO, § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, § 97 Abs. 1, § 101 Abs. 1 ZPO; Non-admission of Revision complaint in civil dispute; omission of written reasoning: The case involved a civil dispute where the plaintiff sought to challenge the lower appellate court's decision, but the supreme court found no grounds to admit the appeal. The decision was issued without a written statement of reasons pursuant to § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, as such an explanation would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for admitting an appeal to the higher instance.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertLegal basis for omitting the statement of reasons in the dismissal of the complaint against the non-admission of the revision.
Basis for imposing the costs of the complaint proceedings, including those caused by the third-party intervention, on the plaintiff.
Volltext
Die Beschwerde der Klägerin gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Urteil des 2. Zivilsenats des Saarländischen Oberlandesgerichts vom 10. November 2021 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 einschließlich der durch die Nebenintervention auf Beklagtenseite verursachten Kosten (§ 97 Abs. 1, § 101 Abs. 1 ZPO).
Gegenstandswert: bis 40.000 €
Halfmeier Kartzke Jurgeleit
Borris Brenneisen