Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep III DoR 120/2013 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2014:III.DOR.120.2013 AI generated

Appeal partially allowed; review permitted on whether objection to evidence non-enforcement was timely under ZPP 286.b(1).

Case Number Sklep III DoR 120/2013
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court partially granted the request to allow a review regarding the timeliness of raising a procedural violation claim. The appellant argued that the failure to execute proposed evidence in the appeal was a procedural error under Article 286.b(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. The court found the conditions for review met and permitted the review specifically on this legal question.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 286.b(1) of the Civil Procedure Act; Article 367.a(1) of the Civil Procedure Act: The court may permit a review if a legal issue concerns the timeliness of raising a procedural violation claim regarding the non-enforcement of proposed evidence.

Keywords

AI generated
Civil Procedure Act procedural violation timeliness of objection non-enforcement of evidence review permission appeal procedure legal issue

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 286.b(1) of the Civil Procedure Act
Article 367.a(1) of the Civil Procedure Act
AI generated
VSL sodba in sklep I Cpg 1112/2004
Appeal court dismisses generic breach claims and remands case for specific factual pleading under ZPP.
VSL sodba I Cpg 910/2012
Appeal dismissed; creditor failed to prove debt transfer validity against debtor's objection.
VSL sodba II Cp 1934/2013
Appeal dismissed; direct payment clause creates direct debt relationship under Construction Act.
VSL sodba I Cp 2288/2010
Appeal dismissed; oral real estate agency contract valid under Civil Code Art. 58 despite lack of written form. No invalidity sanction for missing form. Parties fully performed obligations.
VSL sodba II Cp 1341/99
Appeal dismissed; defendant must repay overdraft from bank account without funds due to breach of contract.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Predlogu se delno ugodi in se revizija dopusti o pravnem vprašanju, ali je bilo uveljavljanje procesne kršitve zaradi neizvedbe predlaganega dokaza v pritožbi pravočasno v smislu določbe prvega odstavka 286.b člena ZPP.

[JEDRO]

Predlogu se delno ugodi in se revizija dopusti o pravnem vprašanju, ali je bilo uveljavljanje procesne kršitve zaradi neizvedbe predlaganega dokaza v pritožbi pravočasno v smislu določbe prvega odstavka 286.b člena ZPP.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče druge stopnje je zavrnilo pritožbo tožene stranke in potrdilo sodbo sodišča prve stopnje, s katero je bil ohranjen v veljavi sklep o izvršbi Okrajnega sodišča v Ljubljani VL 203072/2009 z dne 6. 1. 2010, po katerem je bilo toženi stranki naloženo plačilo 10.800,00 EUR z zakonskimi zamudnimi obrestmi od 7. 3. 2009 dalje.

2. Zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje vlaga predlog za dopustitev revizije tožena stranka.

3. Revizijsko sodišče ugotavlja, da so pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP) izpolnjeni glede pravnega vprašanja, navedenega v izreku tega sklepa. Zato je predlogu ugodilo in revizijo glede tega vprašanja dopustilo.