Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS sklep III DoR 148/2015 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2016:III.DOR.148.2015 AI generated

Supreme Court dismisses review application as statutory conditions for admissibility were not met.

Case Number VSRS sklep III DoR 148/2015
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Slovenia rejected the defendant's application for permission to file a review. The first-instance court ordered payment for construction work based on a direct claim, while the second-instance court upheld this decision. The review application was inadmissible because the specific conditions required by the Code of Civil Procedure for granting such a review were not satisfied.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

367.a člen ZPP; 367.c člen ZPP: A review application is inadmissible if the statutory conditions for its admissibility under the Code of Civil Procedure are not met.

Keywords

AI generated
review application admissibility conditions Code of Civil Procedure construction contract direct claim second instance court dismissal of review

Cited Legislation

AI generated
367.a člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku
Ker niso izpolnjeni pogoji, ki jih za dopustitev revizije določa 367.a člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku, je Vrhovno sodišče predlog toženke v skladu z drugim odstavkom 367.c člena ZPP zavrnilo.
367.c člen Zakona o pravdnem postopku
AI generated
sodba II U 429/2011
Administrative court dismisses appeal against inspector's order to stop illegal construction, holding owner is liable as primary obligor.
VSL Sodba II Cp 1136/2024
Court holds construction contract with unit owners is not commercial, so general five-year statute of limitations applies.
VSL Sodba II Cpg 518/2023
Appeal dismissed; manager loses claim against new owner due to lack of valid management contract and failure to prove payments.
Sodba III Ips 122/2005
Subcontractor's direct claim against client rejected due to contractor's prior payment and invalid debt assignment.
VSRS Sklep I Up 39/2016
Supreme Court allows appeal against administrative court dismissal, ruling that failure to notify new owner of statutory participation right constitutes a valid ground for litigation.

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 Zakona o pravdnem postopku, je Vrhovno sodišče predlog toženke v skladu z drugim odstavkom 367.c člena ZPP zavrnilo.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je ugodilo tožbenemu zahtevku (spor je izšel iz izvršbe) za plačilo terjatve zaradi opravljenih gradbenih del, in sicer na podlagi neposrednega zahtevka tožnice zoper naročnico gradbenih del po 631. členu Obligacijskega zakonika (v nadaljevanju OZ). Presodilo je namreč, da je toženka pristopila k dolgu naročnice gradbenih del po 432. členu OZ.

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je toženkino pritožbo zavrnilo in potrdilo izpodbijano sodbo.

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

4. 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.