Non-authorization of revision: dispensation from substantive reasoning under § 544(6) Sentence 2 ZPO
Deutschland (DE)
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Federal Court of Justice dismissed the plaintiff's complaint against the non-authorization of revision, thereby upholding the final judgment of the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court, which remains in force. The dispute concerned a civil matter where the plaintiff challenged the lower court’s refusal to grant leave for appeal to the supreme level, seeking to overturn the proceedings below. The court denied relief without providing a substantive reasoning, relying on the procedural rule that a motivation is unnecessary if it would not contribute to clarifying the conditions under which a revision is to be admitted (§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2nd Half-Sentence ZPO). Consequently, the plaintiff bears the costs of the complaint proceedings, with the amount in dispute capped at €600,000.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO, § 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO; Non-authorization of revision: dispensation from substantive reasoning under § 544(6) Sentence 2 ZPO: The dispute concerned a civil matter where the plaintiff challenged the lower court’s refusal to grant leave for appeal to the supreme level, seeking to overturn the proceedings below. The court denied relief without providing a substantive reasoning, relying on the procedural rule that a motivation is unnecessary if it would not contribute to clarifying the conditions under which a revision is to be admitted (§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2nd Half-Sentence ZPO). Consequently, the plaintiff bears the costs of the complaint proceedings, with the amount in dispute capped at €600,000.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertCited in the dispositive to justify the omission of a substantive reasoning for the dismissal of the complaint because it would not contribute to clarifying the conditions for admitting revision.
Cited in the dispositive to order the plaintiff to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings.
Volltext
Die Beschwerde der Klägerin gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Urteil des 12. Zivilsenats des Oberlandesgerichts Stuttgart vom 24. September 2024 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: bis 600.000 €
Pamp Halfmeier Graßnack
Borris Hannamann