Objection to non-admission of civil revision under § 544 ZPO; omission of reasoning permitted where it does not contribute to clarifying admission conditions
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Federal Court of Justice (BGH) dismissed the defendants' complaint against the non-acceptance of appeal to the BGH, thereby upholding the Oberlandesgericht München's refusal to allow a revision and leaving the lower court's decision in force. The dispute arose from a civil litigation proceeding with a subject matter value of up to €440,000, in which the defendants challenged the admissibility of a higher appeal following a preliminary ruling on non-acceptance. The court denied a written statement of reasons pursuant to § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, as such a rationale would not contribute to clarifying the conditions for admitting a revision; consequently, the defendants were ordered to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings as joint and several debtors, while the interveners on the defendant side were required to bear their own intervention costs under §§ 97, 100, and 101 ZPO.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO, § 100 Abs. 4 Satz 1 ZPO, § 101 Abs. 1 ZPO; Objection to non-admission of civil revision under § 544 ZPO; omission of reasoning permitted where it does not contribute to clarifying admission conditions: The dispute arose from a civil litigation proceeding with a subject matter value of up to €440,000, in which the defendants challenged the admissibility of a higher appeal following a preliminary ruling on non-acceptance. The court denied a written statement of reasons pursuant to § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, as such a rationale would not contribute to clarifying the conditions for admitting a revision; consequently, the defendants were ordered to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings as joint and several debtors, while the interveners on the defendant side were required to bear their own intervention costs under §§ 97, 100, and 101 ZPO.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertJustifies the omission of a written statement of reasons for the dismissal of the complaint against non-acceptance of revision.
Applied to order the costs of the complaint proceedings to be borne by the defendants.
Applied to order the interveners to bear the costs of their intervention.
Applied to order the interveners to bear the costs of their intervention.
Volltext
Die Beschwerde der Beklagten zu 1 und 3 gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Beschluss des 9. Zivilsenats des Oberlandesgerichts München vom 19. Oktober 2023 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 Beklagten zu 1 und 3 tragen die Kosten des Beschwerdeverfahrens als Gesamtschuldner. Die durch die Nebenintervention auf Beklagtenseite entstandenen Kosten tragen die Streithelfer selbst (§ 97 Abs. 1, § 100 Abs. 4 Satz 1, § 101 Abs. 1 ZPO).
Gegenstandswert: bis zu 440.000 €
Pamp Jurgeleit Graßnack
Borris Hannamann