Why is the jurisprudence backward

BGH, decision from 05/30/2017 - File number V ZB 41/13

reasons

The reminder, permissible in accordance with Section 11 (2) sentence 1 RPflG, of the cancellation of the legal aid granted to the appellant by decision of April 3, 2014 with monthly installments of € 15, which was ordered by the decision of April 10, 2017, is unfounded.

Pursuant to Section 124 (1) No. 5ZPO, the court can revoke the approval of legal aid if the party is in arrears with the payment of a monthly installment for more than three months. These prerequisites are met. According to the billing office of the Federal Court of Justice, the installments to be paid since July 2016 are in arrears. Insofar as the appellant asserts that he made payments in the months of July to October 2016, this is true. However, the payments were offset against the arrears for the months from March to June 2016, so that the arrears were correctly determined by the billing center. In a letter dated January 9, 2017, the appellant was informed of the arrears in payments and the possibility of revoking the approval of legal aid. In a letter dated March 6, 2017, he was given a deadline to pay the arrears with a further reference to the otherwise occurring consequences. Concrete indications that the appellant is not responsible for the arrears (cf. BGH, decision of January 9, 1997 - IX ZR 61/94, NJW 1997, 1077) have neither been presented nor otherwise evident.