Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS sklep III DoR 81/2015 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2015:III.DOR.81.2015 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses review application as statutory admissibility conditions under ZPP are not met.

Case Number VSRS sklep III DoR 81/2015
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia rejected the applicant's request for review of the second-instance judgment. The applicant sought to challenge a decision regarding legal fees for administrative proceedings on electricity tax refunds, which the lower courts had upheld as consistent with standard market rates. The court denied the review because the specific procedural requirements for admissibility outlined in Article 367.a of the Code of Civil Procedure were not satisfied.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

367.a člen ZPP; 367.c člen ZPP: A review application is inadmissible if the applicant fails to demonstrate that the lower court's decision violates the law or is otherwise not legally sound according to the strict criteria set forth in Article 367.a of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Keywords

AI generated
review application admissibility Code of Civil Procedure legal fees standard administrative proceedings electricity tax refund supreme court review procedural requirements

Cited Legislation

AI generated
367.a člen ZPP
Ker niso izpolnjeni pogoji, ki jih za dopustitev revizije določa 367.a člen ZPP, je Vrhovno sodišče predlog toženke v skladu z drugim odstavkom 367.c člena ZPP zavrnilo.
367.c člen ZPP
AI generated
VSL sklep I Cpg 377/99
Appeal allowed; electricity usage calculation based on metered consumption, not landlord's invoice, requires new trial.
VSRS Sklep II DoR 36/2024
Supreme Court rejects review application regarding civil court binding to final criminal judgment on damages.
VSL sodba I Cp 2222/2009
Appeal dismissed; court held defendant capable of acting and statute of limitations not applicable on appeal.
VSL sodba II Cp 3683/2011
Appeal dismissed; small value proceedings binding on facts; irrelevant handwriting evidence rejected.
VSL sodba II Cp 2895/2014
Appeal dismissed; unjust enrichment rules inapplicable when management violates prohibition of interfering in another's business.

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 zavrne.

[JEDRO]

Ker niso izpolnjeni pogoji, ki jih za dopustitev revizije določa 367.a člen ZPP, je Vrhovno sodišče predlog toženke v skladu z drugim odstavkom 367.c člena ZPP zavrnilo.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Prvostopenjsko sodišče je v celoti ugodilo tožbenemu zahtevku (spor je izšel iz izvršbe), saj je presodilo, da vtoževani znesek za storitve svetovanja in zastopanja v upravnem postopku za vračilo trošarine za porabljeno električno energijo ustreza običajni ceni iz 778. člena Obligacijskega zakonika. Pritožbeno sodišče je zavrnilo pritožbo toženke in potrdilo prvostopenjsko sodbo.

2. Toženka je zoper sodbo sodišča druge stopnje vložila predlog za dopustitev revizije.

3. Ker niso izpolnjeni pogoji, ki jih za dopustitev revizije določa 367.a člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku (v nadaljevanju ZPP), je Vrhovno sodišče predlog toženke v skladu z drugim odstavkom 367.c člena ZPP zavrnilo.