Entscheidung
OGH · 1Ob388/58; 8Ob172/70; 6Ob21/73; 3Ob92/76; 6Ob595/77; 7Ob627/77 (7Ob628/77); 6Ob741/78; 7Ob686/79; 1Ob615/80; 7Ob741/81; 7Ob596/82 (7Ob597/82); 1Ob595/83; 1Ob607/83 (1Ob608/83); 3Ob520/83; 6Ob665/84; 8Ob519/85 (8Ob520/85); 1Ob707/85; 7Ob642/85; 1Ob558/86 (1Ob559/86); 3Ob594/86; 6Ob639/88; 7Ob514/91; 1Ob679/90; 1Ob575/95; 1Ob140/00w; 6Ob309/02p · 29. April 2004
1Ob388/58; 8Ob172/70; 6Ob21/73; 3Ob92/76; 6Ob595/77; 7Ob627/77 (7Ob628/77); 6Ob741/78; 7Ob686/79; 1Ob615/80; 7Ob741/81; 7Ob596/82 (7Ob597/82); 1Ob595/83; 1Ob607/83 (1Ob608/83); 3Ob520/83; 6Ob665/84; 8Ob519/85 (8Ob520/85); 1Ob707/85; 7Ob642/85; 1Ob558/86 (1Ob559/86); 3Ob594/86; 6Ob639/88; 7Ob514/91; 1Ob679/90; 1Ob575/95; 1Ob140/00w; 6Ob309/02p · OGH · 29. April 2004
Den vollständigen Entscheidungstext findest du im verknüpften RIS-Original.