BGH XI ZR 99/16•Consumer loan withdrawal notice and start of withdrawal period
BGH XI ZR 99/16Bgh / Civil Chamber 1127.09.2016Dismissed
Von Omnilex extrahiert
The Federal Court of Justice rejected the plaintiffs' complaint against denial of leave to appeal in a dispute over withdrawal of a consumer loan contract. It held that the case had no fundamental importance and did not require a decision by the court of revision for development of the law or uniformity of case law. The court therefore left the lower court judgment undisturbed and, without further reasoning, dismissed the complaint. The plaintiffs were ordered to bear the costs of the complaint proceedings.
§ 543 Abs. 2 Satz 1 ZPO; complaint against refusal of leave to appeal in a consumer loan withdrawal case; revision is inadmissible where the matter lacks fundamental significance and neither development of the law nor safeguarding of uniform case law calls for a decision of the court of revision. The Federal Court of Justice may dispense with a fuller statement of reasons under § 544 Abs. 4 Satz 2 Halbs. 2 ZPO when the non-admission complaint is dismissed. Costs follow § 97 Abs. 1 ZPO.
Entscheidungsdatum: 2016-09-27
Aktenzeichen: XI ZR 99/16
Dokumenttyp: Beschluss
Normen: § 495 aF BGB, § 14 Abs 1 aF BGB-InfoV, § 14 Abs 3 aF BGB-InfoV, § 355 Abs 2 S 3 BGB vom 02.12.2004
Spruchkörper: 11. Zivilsenat
Widerruf eines Verbraucherdarlehensvertrags: Wirksamkeit einer Widerrufsbelehrung hinsichtlich des Anlaufens der Widerrufsfrist
Die Beschwerde der Kläger gegen die Nichtzulassung der Revision in dem Urteil des 13. Zivilsenats des Hanseatischen Oberlandesgerichts in Hamburg vom 10. Februar 2016 wird zurückgewiesen, weil die Rechtssache keine grundsätzliche Bedeutung hat und die Fortbildung des Rechts sowie die Sicherung einer einheitlichen Rechtsprechung eine Entscheidung des Revisionsgerichts nicht erfordern (§ 543 Abs. 2 Satz 1 ZPO). Von einer näheren Begründung wird gemäß § 544 Abs. 4 Satz 2 Halbs. 2 ZPO abgesehen.
Die Kläger tragen die Kosten des Beschwerdeverfahrens (§ 97 Abs. 1 ZPO).
Der Gegenstandswert des Beschwerdeverfahrens beträgt bis 35.000 €.
Ellenberger Joeres Matthias
Menges Dauber
Von Omnilex extrahiert
Whether the complaint against denial of leave to appeal was well-founded in a consumer loan withdrawal case
The complaint was unfounded; leave to appeal was not required.
The matter had no fundamental significance and did not require development of the law or safeguarding of uniform case law; therefore the statutory conditions for revision were absent.
Whether the withdrawal notice triggered the withdrawal period under the former consumer-credit information rules
The court did not provide a substantive review on the merits in this order; it only held that revision was not to be admitted.
The Senate expressly dispensed with a fuller reasoning under the procedural rule applicable to non-admission complaints.
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.