Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
VII ZR 873/21 ECLI:DE:BGH:2022:100822BVIIZR873.21.0 KI-generiert

Admissibility of non-admission of revision complaint where reasoning would not clarify admissibility prerequisites

Geschäftsnummer VII ZR 873/21
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Deutschland (DE)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Abgewiesen (Dismissed)
Kostenauflage zulasten Beschwerdeführer/in
Originalquelle öffnen Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The Federal Court of Justice dismissed the plaintiff's complaint against the non-admission of their appeal in revision, thereby upholding the appellate court's denial of leave to appeal and leaving the lower court's judgment in force. The dispute concerned a civil case where the plaintiffs sought to challenge an appellate decision via revision, with the case involving a value in dispute of 29,000 euros. The court relied on § 544(6) sentence 2, second half-sentence of the Code of Civil Procedure to waive providing a detailed written justification, determining that such an explanation would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for the admissibility of a revision. The plaintiffs were ordered to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings pursuant to § 97(1) ZPO.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO; Admissibility of non-admission of revision complaint where reasoning would not clarify admissibility prerequisites: The dispute concerned a civil case where the plaintiffs sought to challenge an appellate decision via revision, with the case involving a value in dispute of 29,000 euros. The court relied on § 544(6) sentence 2, second half-sentence of the Code of Civil Procedure to waive providing a detailed written justification, determining that such an explanation would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for the admissibility of a revision. The plaintiffs were ordered to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings pursuant to § 97(1) ZPO.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Revision eines Entscheids Zivilprozessordnung Streitwert Rückzug des Revisionsgesuchs prozessuale Einreden Anfechtbarkeit des Rückweisungsentscheids

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO
Justifies the waiver of a written reasoning for the dismissal of the complaint, as such an explanation would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for the admissibility of a revision.
§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO
Applied to order the plaintiffs to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings.
KI-generiert
VII ZR 204/22
Non-admission of revision: Omission of justification permitted where clarifying admissibility criteria is not contributed
VII ZR 96/23
Non-admission of revision: waiver of reasoning where clarification of admissibility criteria is not expected
VII ZR 852/21
Dismissal of complaint against non-admission of revision in civil procedure and dispensation from reasoning
VII ZR 188/23
Non-admission of revision in civil proceedings: waiver of reasoning where it would not clarify admissibility prerequisites
VII ZR 851/21
Non-admission of revision for lack of clarifying potential under § 544 Abs. 6 ZPO

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO

Justifies the waiver of a written reasoning for the dismissal of the complaint, as such an explanation would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for the admissibility of a revision.

§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO

Applied to order the plaintiffs to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings.

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

Die Beschwerde der Kläger gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Beschluss des 4. Zivilsenats des Oberlandesgerichts Celle 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 Kläger tragen die Kosten des Beschwerdeverfahrens (§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO).

Gegenstandswert: 29.000 €

Pamp Kartzke Graßnack

Sacher Borris