Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS sklep III DoR 106/2014 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2014:III.DOR.106.2014 AI generated

Supreme Court allows appeal regarding appellate court's failure to address general terms of business content as a procedural violation.

Case Number VSRS sklep III DoR 106/2014
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 appeal specifically concerning whether the appellate court committed a significant procedural violation by dismissing the appellant's arguments on the content of general terms of business as blanket statements. The first-instance court upheld the enforcement of a judgment ordering the defendant to pay over 160,000 EUR, while the appellate court rejected the defendant's appeal without addressing these specific content arguments. The court ruled that the appellate court's failure to engage with these substantive points constituted a significant procedural violation under the Code of Civil Procedure, thereby allowing the appeal on this narrow issue.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Zakon o pravdnem postopku, 367.a odst. 1: An appeal is admissible if the appellate court committed a significant procedural violation by failing to address specific arguments regarding the content of general terms of business as blanket statements.

Keywords

AI generated
significant procedural violation general terms of business blanket statements appellate court failure Code of Civil Procedure appeal admissibility substantive argument dismissal

Cited Legislation

AI generated
367.a odst. 1 Zakona o pravdnem postopku
AI generated
Sklep III DoR 24/2012
Supreme Court allows appeal on lease termination and unjust enrichment conditions in Slovenian civil procedure.
VSL sodba in sklep II Cp 526/2009
Appellate court partially allowed appeal by reducing unpaid rent claim due to statute of limitations on amended portion.
VSRS Sklep II DoR 536/2019
Supreme Court allows review to determine if investor was legally required to implement safety measures on a construction site.
VSL sodba II Cp 620/2004
Appeal dismissed; damages for mining damage equal replacement construction costs, not market value.
VDSS sodba Pdp 100/2014
Employment court partially allows appeal on severance pay continuity and lawyer fees for retrial.

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

Predlog se dopusti glede vprašanja, ali je sodišče druge stopnje storilo bistveno kršitev določb pravdnega postopka, ko je pritožbene navedbe o vsebini splošnih pogojev poslovanja ocenilo kot pavšalne in se posledično do njih ni opredelilo.

[JEDRO]

Predlog se dopusti glede vprašanja, ali je sodišče druge stopnje storilo bistveno kršitev določb pravdnega postopka, ko je pritožbene navedbe o vsebini splošnih pogojev poslovanja ocenilo kot pavšalne in se posledično do njih ni opredelilo.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je v delu, relevantnem za odločitev o predlogu za dopustitev revizije, razsodilo, da sklep o izvršbi Okrajnega sodišča v Ljubljani, Ig 2006/00111 z dne 25. 1. 2006 ostane v veljavi v 1. točki izreka glede plačila 78.846,98 EUR s pripadajočimi zamudnimi obrestmi (I. točka izreka sodbe) ter da je tožena stranka dolžna tožeči v roku 15 dni plačati znesek 85.645,83 EUR s pripadajočimi zamudnimi obrestmi (III. točka izreka sodbe).

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je pritožbo tožene stranke zoper navedeni del izreka sodbe sodišča prve stopnje zavrnilo.

3. Vrhovno sodišče je ugotovilo, da glede vprašanja, opredeljenega v izreku tega sklepa, obstajajo pogoji za dopustitev revizije iz prvega odstavka 367.a člena Zakona o pravdnem postopku, zato je revizijo glede tega vprašanja dopustilo.