Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
V ZR 25/21 ECLI:DE:BGH:2023:260723BVZR25.21.0 KI-generiert

Competence of senior-most sitting judge to correct hearing minutes after presiding judge's retirement

Geschäftsnummer V ZR 25/21
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Deutschland (DE)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Gutgeheissen (Allowed)
Originalquelle öffnen Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) 5th Civil Senate granted the plaintiff's application and ordered the correction of the minutes of the oral hearing from November 12, 2021, to explicitly state that the defendant had appeared personally alongside their attorney. This procedural dispute involved a challenge to the accuracy of the court record regarding party presence in a revision proceeding, where the plaintiff argued their personal attendance had been incorrectly omitted or misrecorded. Relying on §§ 164(3) sentence 2 and 163(2) ZPO applied mutatis mutandis, the court determined that following the retirement of the presiding judge, authority to correct the minutes transferred to the senior-most sitting judge who participated in the hearing, who subsequently validated the correction based on written evidence from the plaintiff's counsel confirming their personal attendance at the session.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

§ 164 Abs. 3 Satz 2 ZPO, § 163 Abs. 2 ZPO; Competence of senior-most sitting judge to correct hearing minutes after presiding judge's retirement: This procedural dispute involved a challenge to the accuracy of the court record regarding party presence in a revision proceeding, where the plaintiff argued their personal attendance had been incorrectly omitted or misrecorded. Relying on §§ 164(3) sentence 2 and 163(2) ZPO applied mutatis mutandis, the court determined that following the retirement of the presiding judge, authority to correct the minutes transferred to the senior-most sitting judge who participated in the hearing, who subsequently validated the correction based on written evidence from the plaintiff's counsel confirming their personal attendance at the session.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
mündliche Verhandlung Revision eines Entscheids prozessleitende Verfügungen Zivilrechtsstreitigkeit richterliche Unparteilichkeit Pensionierung

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
§ 164 Abs. 3 Satz 2 ZPO
Procedural rule establishing the jurisdiction of the senior-most sitting judge to correct the hearing minutes after the presiding judge retired.
§ 163 Abs. 2 ZPO
Legal basis applied mutatis mutandis to determine jurisdiction for the correction of the minutes.
KI-generiert
RiZ (R) 2/24
Correction of hearing protocol: accuracy of recited judicial duties under § 66 DRiG
VIII B 90/09
Competence of non-participating judges for protocol correction and evidentiary requirements for contested process-terminating declarations
B 13 R 177/17 B
Unsworn lay judge participation in social court hearing: invalid court composition and absolute ground for revision
2 B 10/21
Disciplinary proceeding voided for violation of hearing rights due to undisclosed retirement of lay judge required to be active civil servant
RiZ 2/16
Correction of court minutes: Validity of procedural record after absent party’s written motions and non-service of prior decisions

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
§ 164 Abs. 3 Satz 2 ZPO

Procedural rule establishing the jurisdiction of the senior-most sitting judge to correct the hearing minutes after the presiding judge retired.

§ 163 Abs. 2 ZPO

Legal basis applied mutatis mutandis to determine jurisdiction for the correction of the minutes.

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

Zivilverfahren: Zuständigkeit des ältesten beisitzenden Richters für die Berichtigung des Verhandlungsprotokolls

[TENOR]

Auf den Antrag des Klägers wird das Protokoll der mündlichen Verhandlung vom 12. November 2021 dahingehend berichtigt, dass der Revisionsbeklagte persönlich mit Rechtsanwalt Dr. W. erschienen ist.

[GRUENDE]

Für die beantragte Berichtigung des Protokolls ist nach Pensionierung der damaligen Vorsitzenden die Unterzeichnerin zuständig, die als dienstälteste beisitzende Richterin an der Verhandlung teilgenommen hat (§ 164 Abs. 3 Satz 2 ZPO, § 163 Abs. 2 ZPO analog, vgl. Stein/Jonas/Roth, ZPO, 23. Aufl., § 164 Rn. 11). Dass der Kläger persönlich an der Sitzung teilgenommen hat, ergibt sich aus einem anlässlich des Termins verfassten Schreiben seines Rechtsanwalts; das Protokoll ist daher entsprechend zu ergänzen.

Brückner