Waiver of reasons for dismissing complaint against non-admission of revision on grounds of lack of clarifying potential
Deutschland (DE)
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) dismissed the plaintiff's complaint against the non-admission of a revision appeal, thereby leaving the judgment of the Higher Regional Court of Naumburg in force. The dispute involved a civil case with a subject matter value up to €22,000, in which the plaintiff sought to challenge the appellate court's refusal to allow a further appeal on legal grounds. The BGH declined to provide a written justification for the dismissal pursuant to § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, deeming that such an explanation would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for admitting a revision, and ordered the plaintiff to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings, except for those arising from the auxiliary intervention on the plaintiff's side.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 101 Abs. 1 ZPO, § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO; Waiver of reasons for dismissing complaint against non-admission of revision on grounds of lack of clarifying potential: The dispute involved a civil case with a subject matter value up to €22,000, in which the plaintiff sought to challenge the appellate court's refusal to allow a further appeal on legal grounds. The BGH declined to provide a written justification for the dismissal pursuant to § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, deeming that such an explanation would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for admitting a revision, and ordered the plaintiff to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings, except for those arising from the auxiliary intervention on the plaintiff's side.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertBasis for waiving the written justification of the dismissal because it would not contribute to clarifying the conditions for admitting revision.
Ground for allocating the costs of the complaint proceedings to the plaintiff.
Ground for requiring the auxiliary intervener to bear the costs caused by their intervention.
Volltext
Die Beschwerde der Klägerin gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Urteil des 4. Zivilsenats des Oberlandesgerichts Naumburg vom 1. Dezember 2022 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 mit Ausnahme der durch die Nebenintervention auf Klägerseite verursachten Kosten, diese trägt der Streithelfer selbst (§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO, § 101 Abs. 1 ZPO.
Gegenstandswert: bis 22.000 €
Pamp Kartzke Jurgeleit
Graßnack Brenneisen