Refusal to grant leave for revision in civil liability dispute and waiver of reasoning requirements under § 544(6) ZPO
Deutschland (DE)
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe German Federal Court of Civil Procedure (BGH) dismissed the defendant's complaint against the lower court's refusal to grant leave for revision, thereby upholding the District Court of Appeal Dresden's judgment of December 11, 2020, and ordering the defendant to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings. The dispute concerned a civil liability matter where the defendant challenged the admissibility of appeal on the basis that the case did not warrant revision, with a subject matter value of €59,375.99. The court relied on § 544(6) Sentence 2, second half-sentence, and § 97(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), declining to provide a substantive reasoned judgment on the specific grounds for the refusal as it deemed the explanation unnecessary for clarifying the general conditions for granting leave for revision.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO; Refusal to grant leave for revision in civil liability dispute and waiver of reasoning requirements under § 544(6) ZPO: The dispute concerned a civil liability matter where the defendant challenged the admissibility of appeal on the basis that the case did not warrant revision, with a subject matter value of €59,375.99. The court relied on § 544(6) Sentence 2, second half-sentence, and § 97(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), declining to provide a substantive reasoned judgment on the specific grounds for the refusal as it deemed the explanation unnecessary for clarifying the general conditions for granting leave for revision.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertBasis for dispelling the requirement to provide a reasoned judgment on the complaint against the refusal to grant leave for revision.
Basis for ordering the defendant to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings.
Volltext
Die Beschwerde des Beklagten gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Urteil des 6. Zivilsenats des Oberlandesgerichts Dresden vom 11. Dezember 2020 in der Fassung des Berichtigungsbeschlusses vom 4. Februar 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).
Der Beklagte trägt die Kosten des Beschwerdeverfahrens (§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO).
Gegenstandswert: 59.375,99 €
Pamp Halfmeier Jurgeleit
Graßnack Brenneisen