Non-admission of revision: omission of reasoned decision permitted under § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2 ZPO
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Federal Court of Justice (7th Civil Senate) dismissed the defendant's complaint against the non-admission of the revision appeal, thereby leaving the Kammergericht’s order of November 15, 2022, in force and upholding the lower court’s procedural decision; the defendant bears the costs of the proceedings. The dispute concerned a civil matter with a value in dispute of €132,215.10, where the defendant sought to challenge the appellate court’s refusal to admit a further appeal to the highest court. The decision was issued as a summary order without written reasons pursuant to § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, as the court determined that a written justification would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for the admission of a revision appeal.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO; Non-admission of revision: omission of reasoned decision permitted under § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2 ZPO: The dispute concerned a civil matter with a value in dispute of €132,215.10, where the defendant sought to challenge the appellate court’s refusal to admit a further appeal to the highest court. The decision was issued as a summary order without written reasons pursuant to § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, as the court determined that a written justification would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for the admission of a revision appeal.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertProcedural basis cited in the operative part for dispensing with a written reasoning on the complaint against the non-admission of the revision.
Provision cited for the imposition of the costs of the complaint proceedings on the losing party.
Volltext
Die Beschwerde der Beklagten gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Beschluss des 27. Zivilsenats des Kammergerichts vom 15. November 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 Beklagte trägt die Kosten des Beschwerdeverfahrens (§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO).
Gegenstandswert: 132.215,10 €
Halfmeier Jurgeleit Graßnack
Sacher Brenneisen