Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Sklep III DoR 2/2014 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2014:III.DOR.2.2014 AI generated

Supreme Court allows review regarding interest on unjustified VAT paid on municipal contributions.

Case Number Sklep III DoR 2/2014
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia permitted the review of the second-instance judgment concerning a claim for interest on unjustified VAT paid on municipal contributions. The applicant argued for interest on the portion of value-added tax deemed incorrectly levied and paid by her side, while the lower courts had dismissed the claim and ordered cost reimbursement. The court granted the review because the legal question regarding the entitlement to such interest and its statutory basis meets the specific criteria for appellate review under the relevant procedural law.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 367a paragraph 1 of the Act on Civil Procedure; The Supreme Court may permit a review when the legal issue concerns the entitlement to interest on unjustified taxes and the applicable legal basis for deciding on such a claim.

Keywords

AI generated
civil procedure review unjustified VAT payment municipal contributions interest entitlement statutory basis requirement

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 367a paragraph 1 of the Act on Civil Procedure
AI generated
VSL sodba II Cp 3121/2016
Appeal dismissed in small value dispute; factual error not a valid ground for appeal under ZPP. Appeal dismissed in small value dispute; factual error not a valid ground for appeal under ZPP.
VSL sklep I Cpg 1310/2011
Appeal dismissed because plaintiff failed to provide advance security for expert witness required to prove additional work claims.
VSL sodba I Cp 236/2016
Court allows amendment of blank bill after payment proposal, ruling strict bill rules do not apply retroactively.
VDSS Sodba Pdp 471/2018
Appeal dismissed; court upheld first instance rejection of claim for property damage and gross negligence.
VSL sklep I Cpg 18/2006
Appeal allowed; first instance court erred by not explicitly warning plaintiff of time limits for submitting evidence in small value proceedings.

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

Revizija se dopusti glede vprašanja, ali je tožnica upravičena do zamudnih obresti za neutemeljeno odmerjen in z njene strani plačan DDV na odmerjen komunalni prispevek ter katera je pravna podlaga za odločanje o tem zahtevku.

[JEDRO]

Revizija se dopusti glede vprašanja, ali je tožnica upravičena do zamudnih obresti za neutemeljeno odmerjen in z njene strani plačan DDV na odmerjen komunalni prispevek ter katera je pravna podlaga za odločanje o tem zahtevku.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je odločilo, da se sklep o izvršbi Okrajnega sodišča v Ljubljani VL 49079/2011 z dne 13. 4. 2011 razveljavi tudi v še ne razveljavljenem delu ter je tožbeni zahtevek zavrnilo (I. točka izreka sodbe), pri čemer je tožeči stranki naložilo, da toženi stranki povrne pravdne stroške (II. točka izreka sodbe).

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je zavrnilo pritožbo tožeče stranke in potrdilo sodbo sodišča prve stopnje (I. točka izreka sodbe), pri čemer je tožeči stranki naložilo, da toženi stranki povrne stroške pritožbenega postopka (II. točka izreka sodbe).

3. Zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje tožeča stranka vlaga predlog za dopustitev revizije.

4. Predlog je utemeljen.

5. Pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku so izpolnjeni glede pravnega vprašanja, povzetega v izreku tega sklepa. Vrhovno sodišče je zato revizijo (v obsegu, začrtanem z navedenim vprašanjem) dopustilo.