Re: Hey Alan, please help comrade dak grok the following

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
> [...]
>> But throwing out the whole "AGB" part does not help the defendant one
>> bit, so there was likely nothing to be gained by contesting this part of
>> the reasoning.
>
> Das Gericht hat rechtsfehlerhafter Weise die 
> Prüfung eines Verstoßes von Art.81 EGV u. §1 GWB 
> unterlassen. 
>
> Das Urteil ist diesbezüglich *offensichtlich* falsch, denn 
> einerseits wird die GPL als AGB bezeichnet, andererseits 
> aber wie ein Individualrechtsgeschäft (read: Individualvertrag) 
> behandelt, um den §139 BGB anwenden zu können. So geht es nicht!

"diesbezüglich" means "in this respect".  I am not disagreeing with this
part of the comment for which you give no source.  But going to appeal
in order to get the right verdict for all the right reasons instead of
the same right verdict for some wrong reasons as well is likely of
little interest to the defendant.

An upright defending lawyer would probably tell his client "we could
likely contest this part successfully, but it would not change the
outcome".

-- 
David Kastrup