Facts
Applicant [A.] requested the revision of the federal court judgment 5A_794/2014, which had established the applicant's paternity of the children [C.B.] and [D.B.] . The children were born in 2010 and 2012, and their mother, [B.B.] , was married to [E.B.] at the time of birth. By judgment of the District Court of Zurich of May 17, 2013, the paternity of the husband had been annulled.
The District Court of Meilen had established in a partial judgment of June 3, 2014, that the applicant was the father of the children, based on DNA expert opinions that resulted in a paternity probability of at least 99.999999%. The High Court of the Canton of Zurich confirmed this judgment on appeal by the applicant.
The applicant appealed to the Federal Court and requested the revision of the judgment 5A_794/2014, which had dismissed the complaint. He claimed that he had subsequently learned of significant facts and discovered decisive evidence that he could not submit in the previous proceedings.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the request for revision and came to the conclusion that the requirements for a revision are not met. The applicant had relied on the grounds for revision according to Art. 123 Abs. 2 lit. a FSCA, according to which in civil cases a revision can be requested if the requesting party subsequently learns of significant facts or discovers decisive evidence that they could not submit in the previous proceedings.
However, the court found that the applicant had not proven the nullity of the judgment rendered in the appeal proceedings on May 17, 2013. The applicant had claimed that the judgment was null and void because the District Court of Zurich was locally incompetent and had not or incorrectly…