Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
BS-7042/2024-VLR ECLI:DK:VLR:2024:BS0000000485 AI generated

Appeal dismissed because leave from the Procedure Permission Board was required under the Rules of Civil Procedure but not obtained.

Case Number BS-7042/2024-VLR
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Denmark (DK)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant's appeal against the District Court's decision regarding witness questioning. The appellant, a former defendant, sought to challenge the lower court's ruling on a matter of inheritance treatment. The court held that such appeals require specific permission from the Procedure Permission Board under the Rules of Civil Procedure, which was not granted. Consequently, the appeal was inadmissible due to the lack of this mandatory procedural prerequisite.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Retsplejelovens § 389 a.; An appeal against a decision made during a main hearing requires permission from the Procedure Permission Board; without such permission, the appeal is inadmissible.

Keywords

AI generated
Rules of Civil Procedure Procedure Permission Board appeal admissibility main hearing decision inadmissible appeal

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Retsplejelovens § 389 a.
retsplejelovens § 389 a., og en sådan tilladelse ikke foreligger
AI generated
BS-28125/2023-VLR
Appeal dismissed because the lower court's ruling on suspensive effect requires Process Permission Board approval under § 389a.
BS-153/2009-VLR
Civil claim dismissed due to lack of required process authorization from the Process Authorization Committee.
BS-9/2014-HJR
Court dismisses appeal on costs as original appeal covered entire lower court decision including costs.
SS-1786/2024-OLR
Court dismisses appeal against High Court ruling on criminal case procedural matter.
BS-557/2011-OLR
Appeal against refusal to accept late complaint under tax law section 64 is dismissed as inadmissible.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Landsretten afviser kæremål fra kærende, tidligere sagsøgte advokat, da byretsafgørelsen kun kan kæres med tilladelse fra Procesbevillingsnævnet, jf. retsplejelovens § 389 a., og en sådan tilladelse ikke foreligger

[DOKUMENT] Retsbog med kendelse (3 sider) VESTRE LANDSRET RETSBOG

Den 4. marts 2024 holdt Vestre Landsret møde i retsbygningen i Viborg.

Landsdommerne Malene Værum Westmark, John Lundum og Emil Revsgaard Larsen (kst.) behandlede sagen.

Sag BS-7042/2024-VLR (14. afdeling)

Kærende, tidligere Sagsøgte

mod

Civilstyrelsen (advokat Sanne H. Christensen)

Under hovedforhandlingen i sagen BS-20068/2023-HOL har Retten i Holstebro den 31. januar 2024 afsagt kendelse om, at Kærende, tidligere Sagsøgte ikke tillades at stille et vidne spørgsmål, der vedrører bobehandlingen i et ægtefælleskifte.

Kærende, tidligere Sagsøgte har kæret afgørelsen.

Civilstyrelsen har ikke udtalt sig.

Landsretten afsagde

KENDELSE

Byrettens afgørelse er truffet i forbindelse med hovedforhandlingen. Afgørelsen kan derfor kun kæres med tilladelse fra Procesbevillingsnævnet, jf. retspleje-lovens § 389 a. Da en sådan tilladelse ikke foreligger, afviser landsretten kære-målet.

/

THI BESTEMMES:

Dette kæremål afvises.

I sagsomkostninger for landsretten skal Kærende, tidligere Sagsøgte inden

14 dage betale i alt 1.250 kr. inkl. moms til Civilstyrelsen. Beløbet forrentes efter rentelovens § 8 a.

Sagen sluttet.

/ Publiceret til portalen d. 04-03-2024 kl. 07:50 Modtagere: Kærende, tidligere Sagsøgte, Indkærede Civilstyrelsen

/