Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
VII ZR 226/21 ECLI:DE:BGH:2023:260423BVIIZR226.21.0 KI-generiert

Waiver of reasoning for denied leave to appeal and cost allocation in ZPO complaint proceedings

Geschäftsnummer VII ZR 226/21
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 non-acceptance complaint, leaving the 16th Civil Senate of the Cologne Higher Regional Court's order of February 3, 2021, refusing to allow an appeal on points of law, in force. The dispute concerned a civil matter with a subject value of €868,180.64, where the plaintiff challenged the lower court's refusal to admit a revision appeal. The court relied on § 544 (6) sentence 2, second half-sentence of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), dispensing with a written rationale as it would not contribute to clarifying the conditions for admitting a revision, and ordered the plaintiff to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings, including those arising from the defendant's auxiliary intervention.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

§ 101 Abs. 1 ZPO, § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO; Waiver of reasoning for denied leave to appeal and cost allocation in ZPO complaint proceedings: The dispute concerned a civil matter with a subject value of €868,180.64, where the plaintiff challenged the lower court's refusal to admit a revision appeal. The court relied on § 544 (6) sentence 2, second half-sentence of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), dispensing with a written rationale as it would not contribute to clarifying the conditions for admitting a revision, and ordered the plaintiff to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings, including those arising from the defendant's auxiliary intervention.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Streitgegenstand zivilrechtliche Revision Verzicht auf Entscheidbegründung Beschwerdelegitimation Verfahrensrügen E-Justice

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
§ 101 Abs. 1 ZPO
Basis for including the costs incurred through the auxiliary intervention in the total costs ordered to be borne by the plaintiff.
§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO
Justifies the court's decision to dispense with a written reasoning for the dismissal of the complaint.
§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO
Basis for ordering the plaintiff to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings as the party who lost the case.
KI-generiert
VII ZR 96/24
Waiver of reasoning in ZPO leave-for-appeal complaint: § 544(6) sentence 2 second half-exclusion
VII ZR 284/21
Waiver of reasons for dismissing complaint against non-admission of revision appeal under § 544 Abs. 6 ZPO
VII ZR 33/23
Waiver of reasoning for dismissal of complaint against denial of leave to appeal for revision under § 544(6) ZPO
VII ZR 201/22
Waiver of reasoning for dismissal of complaint against non-admission of revision under § 544(6)(2) ZPO
VII ZR 41/24
Waiver of reasoning in complaint against denial of leave for revision under § 544 Abs. 6 ZPO

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

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

Justifies the court's decision to dispense with a written reasoning for the dismissal of the complaint.

§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO

Basis for ordering the plaintiff to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings as the party who lost the case.

§ 101 Abs. 1 ZPO

Basis for including the costs incurred through the auxiliary intervention in the total costs ordered to be borne by the plaintiff.

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 Klägerin gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Beschluss des 16. Zivilsenats des Oberlandesgerichts Köln vom 3. 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).

Die Klägerin trägt die Kosten des Beschwerdeverfahrens einschließlich der durch die Nebenintervention auf Seiten der Beklagten entstandenen Kosten (§ 97 Abs. 1, § 101 Abs. 1 ZPO).

Gegenstandswert: 868.180,64 €

Pamp

Kartzke

Jurgeleit

Sacher