Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep III DoR 21/2014 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2014:III.DOR.21.2014 AI generated

Appeal allowed regarding passive legitimation of defendant for payment of claims after prior judgments.

Case Number Sklep III DoR 21/2014
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The appellate court granted the defendant's request to allow an appeal specifically concerning the defendant's passive legitimation for paying the plaintiff's claims. While the first and second instance courts ordered the defendant to pay over 93,000 EUR with interest, the defendant argued the appeal should be permitted only on this specific legal question. The court decided to allow the appeal solely regarding passive legitimation because it constitutes a significant legal issue, while dismissing the appeal on other grounds as they do not involve important legal questions.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Zakon o pravdnem postopku, 367.a odst. 1: An appeal is admissible regarding a specific legal question if it concerns a significant legal issue, even if the appeal is filed against the entire judgment.

Keywords

AI generated
passive legitimation payment of claims appeal admissibility significant legal issue Zakon o pravdnem postopku third instance court partial admissibility

Cited Legislation

AI generated
367.a odst. 1 Zakona o pravdnem postopku
AI generated
Sodba II Ips 375/2003
Slovenian Supreme Court dismissed appeal on contract rescission, upholding seller's right to retain partial payment.
VSL Sodba II Cp 1234/2018
Appeal dismissed; court rejects claim that failure to explain evidence denial violates procedural rules.
VSM Sodba I Cpg 104/2023
Contractor dismissed claim for damages due to lack of causal link between environmental permit issues and contract termination.
VSL Sodba I Cpg 415/2021
Appeal dismissed; insurance contract void due to missing vehicle data and undefined claim amount.
Sklep III DoR 86/2013
Supreme Court allows review regarding proper application of procedural defect grounds under ZPP Article 339.2(11).

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 ugodi in se revizija dopusti glede vprašanja:

- Ali je tožena stranka pasivno legitimirana glede plačila terjatev tožeče stranke po izpodbijanih sodbah?

[JEDRO]

Revizija se dopusti glede vprašanja ali je tožena stranka pasivno legitimirana glede plačila terjatev tožeče stranke po izpodbijanih sodbah?

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je toženi stranki naložilo plačilo 93.478,19 EUR z zakonskimi zamudnimi obresti. Sodišče druge stopnje je prvostopenjsko sodbo potrdilo.

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

3. Revizijsko sodišče ugotavlja, da so izpolnjeni pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku glede pravnega vprašanja, opredeljenega v izreku sklepa. Revizijo je zato v tem obsegu dopustilo.

4. Glede preostalih vprašanj pogoji za dopustitev revizije niso izpolnjeni, saj ne gre za pomembna pravna vprašanja.