Waiver of reasoned dismissal of complaint against non-admission of revision under § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2 ZPO
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Federal Court of Justice dismissed the plaintiff's complaint against the non-admission of leave to appeal, upholding the judgment of the Higher Regional Court of Hamm and denying the plaintiff a further appeal on points of law; the plaintiff bears the costs of the complaint proceedings. The dispute concerned a civil matter where the appellate court had previously refused to admit revision, and the supreme court review focused on whether the legal questions met the threshold for significance. The decision was issued without substantive reasoning under § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, as the court determined that a written justification would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for admitting a revision, relying on the procedural norms governing non-admission complaints in civil proceedings.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO; Waiver of reasoned dismissal of complaint against non-admission of revision under § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2 ZPO: The dispute concerned a civil matter where the appellate court had previously refused to admit revision, and the supreme court review focused on whether the legal questions met the threshold for significance. The decision was issued without substantive reasoning under § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, as the court determined that a written justification would not contribute to clarifying the prerequisites for admitting a revision, relying on the procedural norms governing non-admission complaints in civil proceedings.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertCited in the operative order to justify the omission of a substantive reasoning because it would not contribute to clarifying the conditions for admitting a revision.
Cited to impose the costs of the complaint proceedings on the plaintiff.
Volltext
Die Beschwerde der Klägerin gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Urteil des 21. Zivilsenats des Oberlandesgerichts Hamm vom2. Dezember 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 (§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO).
Gegenstandswert: 1.056.261,74 €
Pamp Halfmeier Jurgeleit
Graßnack Brenneisen