Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSRS sklep III DoR 56/2014 ECLI:SI:VSRS:2014:III.DOR.56.2014 AI generated

Supreme Court allows appeal regarding whether lower court should have examined passive standing beyond the contract.

Case Number VSRS sklep III DoR 56/2014
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 an appeal specifically concerning the procedural handling of passive standing in a contract dispute. The lower appellate court dismissed the claimant's request based solely on the contract, finding the defendant was not a party to it, while the first-instance court had rejected the claim without finding illegality. The court ruled that the appellate court should have evaluated the standing objection within the broader context of other evidence submitted, as required by the relevant procedural code.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 367a paragraph 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure; Article 347 paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure: An appellate court must examine objections to passive standing not only based on the contract but also within the scope of other conducted evidence if the first-instance court failed to do so.

Keywords

AI generated
passive standing contract dispute appellate procedure evidence scope civil procedure code

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 367a paragraph 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure
Article 347 paragraph 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure
AI generated
VSC Sklep Cp 85/2025
Appeal dismissed; State Forest Fund not a passive party for restitution and compensation claims under ZIKS and ZDen.
VDSS sodba Pdp 866/2014
Labor court dismisses mobbing claim against superior for requesting work documentation regarding representative duties.
VSK Sodba I Cp 415/2017
Appeal dismissed; prior climbing experience irrelevant to liability for student fall on military climbing wall.
VSL Sodba II Cp 1403/2018
Appeal dismissed; court held witnesses need not detail every fact if key facts stem from party claims.
VSL sodba I Cp 1309/99
Appeal dismissed; worker liable for injury due to improper tool use on simple task.

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 pravilno ravnanje sodišča druge stopnje, ki je zgolj na podlagi pogodbe ugodilo ugovoru pasivne legitimacije, ali bi moralo sodišče druge stopnje ugovor presojati tudi v okviru drugih izvedenih dokazov in v ta namen postopati skladno z določbo drugega odstavka 347. člena ZPP.

[JEDRO]

Revizija se dopusti glede vprašanja, ali je pravilno ravnanje sodišča druge stopnje, ki je zgolj na podlagi pogodbe ugodilo ugovoru pasivne legitimacije, ali bi moralo sodišče druge stopnje ugovor presojati tudi v okviru drugih izvedenih dokazov in v ta namen postopati skladno z določbo drugega odstavka 347. člena ZPP.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

1. Sodišče prve stopnje je, ker v ravnanju tožene stranke ni našlo protipravnosti, zavrnilo odškodninski zahtevek za plačilo 28.800,00 EUR.

2. Sodišče druge stopnje je izpodbijano sodbo potrdilo,vendar iz drugih razlogov. Ugotovilo je, da tožena stranka ni bila stranka pogodbe, in ugodilo ugovoru pasivne legitimacije.

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.