Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
VII ZR 36/23 ECLI:DE:BGH:2023:050723BVIIZR36.23.0 KI-generiert

Timeliness of reasoned complaint against refusal to admit revision

Geschäftsnummer VII ZR 36/23
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 (BGH) dismissed the plaintiff's complaint against the refusal to admit revision, ordering that the plaintiff bears the costs, thereby leaving the underlying judgment of the Kammergericht in force. The dispute concerned a civil matter involving a claim of up to €155,000, where the plaintiff challenged the Berlin Kammergericht's decision not to allow the case to proceed to the BGH on the grounds of insufficient legal significance or inconsistency. The dismissal was grounded in procedural law rather than the merits, as the BGH found that the plaintiff failed to file the reasoned complaint within the statutory deadline, resulting in a rejection based on § 544 Abs. 4 and § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

§§ 544 Abs. 4, 97 Abs. 1 ZPO; Timeliness of reasoned complaint against refusal to admit revision: The dispute concerned a civil matter involving a claim of up to €155,000, where the plaintiff challenged the Berlin Kammergericht's decision not to allow the case to proceed to the BGH on the grounds of insufficient legal significance or inconsistency. The dismissal was grounded in procedural law rather than the merits, as the BGH found that the plaintiff failed to file the reasoned complaint within the statutory deadline, resulting in a rejection based on § 544 Abs. 4 and § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Revision eines Entscheids Streitgegenstand gesetzliche Verfahrensfrist gesetzliche Voraussetzungen begründeter Entscheid Rückzug des Revisionsgesuchs

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
§§ 544 Abs. 4, 97 Abs. 1 ZPO
The provisions explicitly cited in the dispositive to justify the dismissal of the complaint because it was not reasoned in time.
KI-generiert
VII ZR 213/22
Non-admission of revision: procedural requirements and dismissal of complaint without substantive reasoning
VII ZR 47/23
Admission of revision: BGH denies substantive justification for dismissing non-acceptance complaint under § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2 ZPO
VII ZR 199/21
Dismissal of complaint against non-admission of revision without substantive reasoning
VII ZR 152/25
Timeliness of justification for complaint against non-admission of revision in civil proceedings
VII ZR 846/21
Dismissal of complaint against non-admission of revision without substantive reasoning

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
§§ 544 Abs. 4, 97 Abs. 1 ZPO

The provisions explicitly cited in the dispositive to justify the dismissal of the complaint because it was not reasoned in time.

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 Urteil des 21. Zivilsenats des Kammergerichts vom 17. Januar 2023 wird auf ihre Kosten verworfen, weil die Beschwerde nicht rechtzeitig begründet worden ist (§§ 544 Abs. 4, 97 Abs. 1 ZPO).

Gegenstandswert: bis 155.000 €

Pamp Halfmeier Kartzke

Jurgeleit Sacher