Waiver of grounds for dismissing complaint against non-admission of revision in civil third-party intervention proceedings
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) dismissed the third-party counter-defendant’s complaint against the non-admission of appeal to the BGH, leaving the Oberlandesgericht München decision of February 4, 2021, in force; the complainant was ordered to bear the costs of the proceedings, with a subject matter in dispute valued at €900,000. The dispute concerned a civil procedure matter where the appellant challenged the lower appellate court’s refusal to permit revision, specifically alleging defects in the non-admission decision. The court applied § 544 (6) sentence 2, second half-sentence of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) to waive a detailed written justification, finding it unnecessary for clarifying the conditions for admitting a revision, and applied § 97 (1) ZPO for cost allocation.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO; Waiver of grounds for dismissing complaint against non-admission of revision in civil third-party intervention proceedings: The dispute concerned a civil procedure matter where the appellant challenged the lower appellate court’s refusal to permit revision, specifically alleging defects in the non-admission decision. The court applied § 544 (6) sentence 2, second half-sentence of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) to waive a detailed written justification, finding it unnecessary for clarifying the conditions for admitting a revision, and applied § 97 (1) ZPO for cost allocation.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertJustifies the omission of a detailed written justification for dismissing the complaint against non-admission of the appeal.
Basis for ordering the losing party to bear the costs of the legal remedy proceedings.
Volltext
Die Beschwerde der Drittwiderbeklagten gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Beschluss des 28. Zivilsenats des Oberlandesgerichts München vom 4. Februar 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 Drittwiderbeklagte trägt die Kosten des Beschwerdeverfahrens (§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO).
Gegenstandswert: 900.000 €
Halfmeier Kartzke Graßnack
Sacher Borris