Dismissal of complaint against non-admission of revision without reasoning under § 544 Abs. 6 ZPO
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Federal Court of Justice (BGH) dismissed the defendant’s complaint, thereby upholding the Cologne Higher Regional Court’s earlier non-admission of the revision appeal; the defendant bears the costs of the complaint proceedings, and the value in dispute is set at €489,142.76. The case involved a civil proceeding where the defendant challenged the lower court’s refusal to admit the appeal for revision, but no substantive merits were reviewed at this level. The court denied the provision of a reasoned decision pursuant to Section 544 Paragraph 6 Sentence 2 Sub-sentence 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), as a detailed rationale would not contribute to clarifying the requirements for admitting a revision, and allocated litigation costs under Section 97 Paragraph 1 ZPO.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiert§ 544 Abs. 6 Satz 2, 2. Halbsatz ZPO, § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO; Dismissal of complaint against non-admission of revision without reasoning under § 544 Abs. 6 ZPO: The case involved a civil proceeding where the defendant challenged the lower court’s refusal to admit the appeal for revision, but no substantive merits were reviewed at this level. The court denied the provision of a reasoned decision pursuant to Section 544 Paragraph 6 Sentence 2 Sub-sentence 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), as a detailed rationale would not contribute to clarifying the requirements for admitting a revision, and allocated litigation costs under Section 97 Paragraph 1 ZPO.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertZentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator
KI-generiertBasis for dispensing with a written reasoning for the dismissal of the complaint.
Provision applied to impose the costs of the complaint proceedings on the losing party.
Volltext
Die Beschwerde der Beklagten gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Beschluss des 19. Zivilsenats des Oberlandesgerichts Köln vom 9. März 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 Beklagte trägt die Kosten des Beschwerdeverfahrens (§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO).
Gegenstandswert: 489.142,76 €
Pamp Kartzke Graßnack
Sacher Borris